From: Francis Laniel <francis.laniel@amarulasolutions.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Cc: michael@amarulasolutions.com, "Marek Behún" <marek.behun@nic.cz>,
"Simon Glass" <sjg@chromium.org>, "Wolfgang Denk" <wd@denx.de>,
hws@denx.de
Subject: How should we deal with actual hush odd behavior?
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 18:12:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2787647.e9J7NaK4W3@pwmachine> (raw)
Hi.
I hope you are fine and the same for your family and friends.
In July, a proposal to add a new shell for U-Boot was posted on the mailing
list [1].
The community discussed a lot about this changes, some people did not agree
with it because the new shell is not compatible with the actual one (hush)
[2].
So, a proposal to update U-Boot actual hush to follow what they currently have
in Busybox was made [3].
Porting 2021 Busybox hush to U-Boot seems, for me, to be a good idea as we
would benefit from Busybox bug fixes as well as being compatible with actual
hush (in theory).
We could also add new features to U-Boot hush, like functions, as they were
added to Busybox.
Nonetheless, the idea of this port is to be compatible.
In practice, I noted some cases when this is actually not the case.
The first one can be related to how && and || operators were handled in hush.
So, the following: false && false || true
Returns 0 on Busybox 2021 hush and 1 on U-Boot.
The behavior of 2021 is coherent with the definition of these operators [4]:
> The return status of AND and OR lists is the exit
> status of the last command executed in the list.
An other example concerns variable expansion, where foo='bar "quux" is
expanded to bar quux in U-Boot and bar "quux in Busybox.
I do not have a real opinion on the second one, as I think local variable set
in U-Boot scripts are quite simple as people do not try to do: foo="bar \"quux
'quuz' \"\"\"corge".
The first one is maybe more problematic.
Grepping "if test" shows me that the more complex if condition seems to be
under the form:
if first_test_ AND/OR second_test
Here also, people seems to no try to write complex expression like: foo ||
bar; echo quux && quuz.
So, porting Busybox 2021 hush can solve bugs we have currently in U-Boot, but
what if fixing these bugs lead to a board script failing and so a device not
booting...
I would like to have the opinion of the community on this question.
Best regards.
---
[1] https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-July/453347.html
[2] https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-July/453790.html
[3] https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-July/453848.html
[4] https://linux.die.net/man/1/bash
next reply other threads:[~2021-08-20 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-20 16:12 Francis Laniel [this message]
2021-08-20 18:22 ` How should we deal with actual hush odd behavior? Simon Glass
2021-08-25 22:24 ` Tom Rini
2021-08-23 11:20 ` Wolfgang Denk
2021-08-31 9:32 ` Francis Laniel
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=2787647.e9J7NaK4W3@pwmachine \
--to=francis.laniel@amarulasolutions.com \
--cc=hws@denx.de \
--cc=marek.behun@nic.cz \
--cc=michael@amarulasolutions.com \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
/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