Path: csiph.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail From: Robert Elz Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug Subject: Re: =?utf-8?B?4oCYY29tbWFuZCDigKYgJuKAmQ==?= creates subshell Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 01:01:25 +0700 Lines: 34 Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <511886e8-2262-39ee-2a01-7d284e981cb1@archlinux.org> <7dvoi92p.dag@gnui.org> <09ea84b2-4fb1-6b05-7c0b-fe6b2ab00c6f@archlinux.org> <2643.1593599092@jinx.noi.kre.to> <24624.1593615917@jinx.noi.kre.to> <29344.1593626485@jinx.noi.kre.to> NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1593626512 11481 209.51.188.17 (1 Jul 2020 18:01:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu Cc: Eli Schwartz , bug-bash@gnu.org To: Dmitry Alexandrov Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: permerror client-ip=2001:3c8:9009:181::2; envelope-from=kre@munnari.OZ.AU; helo=munnari.OZ.AU X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -8 X-Spam_score: -0.9 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=1, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-bash@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <29344.1593626485@jinx.noi.kre.to> X-Mailman-Original-References: <511886e8-2262-39ee-2a01-7d284e981cb1@archlinux.org> <7dvoi92p.dag@gnui.org> <09ea84b2-4fb1-6b05-7c0b-fe6b2ab00c6f@archlinux.org> <2643.1593599092@jinx.noi.kre.to> <24624.1593615917@jinx.noi.kre.to> Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:16518 Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:45:07 +0300 From: Dmitry Alexandrov Message-ID: | One could argue, that an ability to ignore builtin utilities actually adds | nothing to applicability of a script to different (unknown a priory) | environments. One can indeed (sometimes when someone a point like that, I reply that one can argue almost anything, it is not whether one can argue it or not that matters, but whether one wins the argument - that is succeeds in convincing people that one is correct) - but I won't do that here, as I don't disagree. The lack of an easy method to force execution of a command from the filesystem is very likely because there is generally no reason to do that. That is, no-one ever really wanted it, so no method was invented. However, for whatever reason, people keep asking how. Either by directly asking the question, or by picking one of the popular (but incorrect) methods, and either claiming it works, or complaining when it doesn't. As best I can tell, other than doing a search of PATH, and then using the full path name (which is what $(type -P cmd) does in bash, more succinctly than shells that don't have this -P option to type), the most reliable, that is, which is 99.99999% unlikely to accidentally invoke a builtin, is gdb cmd run but putting that in a script would be absurd. kre