From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:28:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:28:09 -0500 Received: from enterprise.cistron.net ([195.64.68.33]:14098 "EHLO enterprise.cistron.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 17:27:51 -0500 From: miquels@traveler.cistron-office.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg) Subject: Re: Linux 2.2.19pre7 Date: 9 Jan 2001 22:27:55 GMT Organization: Cistron Internet Services B.V. Message-ID: <93g39b$a9b$1@enterprise.cistron.net> In-Reply-To: <3A5B6437.3BC23AD3@metabyte.com> X-Trace: enterprise.cistron.net 979079275 10539 195.64.65.67 (9 Jan 2001 22:27:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@cistron.nl X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test74 (May 26, 2000) Originator: miquels@traveler.cistron-office.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg) To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In article <3A5B6437.3BC23AD3@metabyte.com>, Pete Zaitcev wrote: >> o Fix kwhich versus old bash (Pete Zaitcev) > >DaveM pointed out that it fixes a non-problem. >I stepped on a bug with an obscure kernel, I think it >was 2.2.18-pre3, which called kwhich with several arguments. >Current kernels call kwhich with one argument at a time, >so they are not affected. Yes, but I think it simply puts something right that might be wrong or at least less portable. So it's correct. Also calling kwhich with multiple arguments was actually the idea behind the script. Oh well, as long as it works ... Mike. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/