Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed (original) (raw)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
From: | Eric Blake |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed |
Date: | Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:00:07 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
According to Jim Meyering on 11/19/2009 2:18 AM:
This was introduced by 0cc0424119ec66c9005fb905cc1001a64b978ce3, to avoid test failures on Cygwin. Unfortunately, if you have an insecure PATH, you now lose on Linux, even though those tests don't search PATH at all. Before, PATH was simply unset, but that wasn't portable to Cygwin.
Here's a patch that avoids failure even if you have an insecure PATH directory, and should also work on Cygwin:
In addition to the nits you've already addressed...
+# Taint checking requires a sanitized PATH.ThisscriptperformsnoPATH. This script performs no PATH.ThisscriptperformsnoPATH +# search, so on most Unix-based systems, it is fine simply to clear $ENV{PATH}. +# However, on Cygwin, it's used to find cygwin.dll, so set it.
s/cygwin.dll/cygwin1.dll/
+$ENV{'PATH'} = '/bin:/usr/bin';
I confirmed that this does indeed pass on cygwin.
Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well!
Eric Blake address@hidden -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAksFQVcACgkQ84KuGfSFAYCtAwCfeb5bjF+K4eUJCjhjBDuxoFcf S0gAn2bmPtGvRc+yJGwxiKcBCNp+7w7x =SL7B -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, (continued)
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Gilles Espinasse, 2009/11/21
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/21
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Gilles Espinasse, 2009/11/21
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Gilles Espinasse, 2009/11/22
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/22
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Alan Curry, 2009/11/22
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/22
* permissions of files in dist tarball (was: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed), Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/11/24
* Re: permissions of files in dist tarball, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/25
* Re: permissions of files in dist tarball, Ralf Wildenhues, 2009/11/27
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed,Eric Blake <=
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/20
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Andreas Schwab, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Andreas Schwab, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Bauke Jan Douma, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/19
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Andreas Schwab, 2009/11/22
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Andreas Schwab, 2009/11/22
* Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed, Jim Meyering, 2009/11/22
- Prev by Date:Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed
- Next by Date:Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed
- Previous by thread:Re: permissions of files in dist tarball
- Next by thread:Re: stable coreutils-8.1 today, fingers crossed
- Index(es):