From: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder@ira.uka.de>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: 601632@bugs.debian.org,
Peter van der Does <peter@avirtualhome.com>,
Kevin Ballard <kevin@sb.org>,
Mathias Lafeldt <misfire@debugon.org>,
Brian Gernhardt <brian@gernhardtsoftware.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bash 4.0 breaks some completion scripts
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 01:11:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101203001157.GC3577@neumann> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101202233848.GA8438@burratino>
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 05:38:48PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > Bash 4.0 changed the rules for completion word splitting so that
> > they are incompatible with 3.x. I think some Breaks: will be needed
> > to ensure smooth upgrades.
>
> Just FYI: Ah, at last some clarity!
>
> From the bash 3 manual:
>
> COMP_WORDS
> An array variable (see Arrays below) consisting of the
> individual words in the current command line. The
> words are split on shell metacharacters as the shell
> parser would separate them. This variable is
> available only in shell functions invoked by the
> programmable completion facilities (see Programmable
> Completion below).
>
> From the bash 4 manual:
>
> COMP_WORDS
> An array variable (see Arrays below) consisting of the
> individual words in the current command line. The
> line is split into words as readline would split it,
> using COMP_WORDBREAKS as described above. This
> variable is available only in shell functions invoked
> by the programmable completion facilities (see
> Programmable Completion below).
Oh dear, oh dear. I've just sent a reply to your message on the git
list with basically the same findigs. [1]
> The workaround used by the bash-completion scripts is to paste words
> from COMP_WORDS together (in _get_comp_words_by_ref).
>
> If only the NEWS file had mentioned it. :)
Actually, the NEWS file does mention it (and Peter noted it right at
the start! [2]):
i. The programmable completion code now uses the same set of characters as
readline when breaking the command line into a list of words.
But it's really easy to misinterpret this statement, because there is
and there was a $COMP_WORDBREAKS, so the first thing that
comes to mind is that the set of characters in $COMP_WORDBREAKS is
changed, leaving you puzzled for weeks when you discover that the
set of characters is still the same.
Best,
Gábor
[1] http://marc.info/?l=git&m=129133327312420&w=2
[2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/159516/focus=159628
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-03 0:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20101027235919.GB30490@burratino>
2010-12-02 23:38 ` bash 4.0 breaks some completion scripts Jonathan Nieder
2010-12-03 0:11 ` SZEDER Gábor [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20101203001157.GC3577@neumann \
--to=szeder@ira.uka.de \
--cc=601632@bugs.debian.org \
--cc=brian@gernhardtsoftware.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=kevin@sb.org \
--cc=misfire@debugon.org \
--cc=peter@avirtualhome.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).