From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2407 invoked by alias); 21 May 2003 23:40:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2326 invoked from network); 21 May 2003 23:40:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO takamaka.act-europe.fr) (209.53.16.215) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 May 2003 23:40:56 -0000 Received: by takamaka.act-europe.fr (Postfix, from userid 507) id C2F88D34B8; Wed, 21 May 2003 16:40:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 23:40:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , Eli Zaretskii , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA/RFC] Problem with '!' escaping with zsh/bash/ksh Message-ID: <20030521234046.GH1027@gnat.com> References: <20030502233458.GP992@gnat.com> <1438-Sat03May2003113601+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> <20030503143251.GA1878@nevyn.them.org> <20030503165109.GT992@gnat.com> <20030503165915.GA16323@nevyn.them.org> <3EB6BBAF.5080504@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EB6BBAF.5080504@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00416.txt.bz2 Andrew, On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 03:29:51PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > Joel, testcase? > > I was going to suggest gdb.base/args.exp but someone's already added that. > Consider an addition to that existing test case pre-approved (and any > other evil combinations you come up with). Coming back to this message, I am not sure I understand what you were suggesting, do you remember? As far as I can tell, args.exp verifies that all arguments are correctly passed to the inferior. In our case, the '!' character was escaped in the executable name, but not in the args (ie the args were left alone). So adding an extra test for arguments containing '!' is fine, but not relevant to the issue at hand. At this point, I am considering the addition of a new test case, which would basically: - compile args.c - copy args to bang! - gdb bang! - run The problem is that this test should work fine on Unix machines but I am guessing that this won't work so well on Windows boxes for instance. What do you think? -- Joel