[comp.bugs.sys5] Bug in csh

peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (10/20/89)

Try this:

% echo foo\
bar
foo bar
% echo 'foo\
bar'
fo
bar
%

... 'nuff said?
-- 
Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-'
"You can tell when a USENET discussion is getting old when one of the      'U`
 participants drags out Hitler and the Nazis" -- Richard Sexton

guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) (10/22/89)

Well, AT&T didn't supply "csh" with S3, nor with any S5 release prior to
S5R4, so "system 5 and system 3" really means "somebody's S3-based and
S5-based releases, with a 'csh' from somewhere".  In at least some
cases, the "somewhere" is a source of a rather old version of "csh" with
plenty of other problems.

The SunOS 4.0.3 version (derived from the 4.3BSD version, so I suspect
any 4.3BSD-derived version and maybe any 4.xBSD-derived version acts the
same) did:

	auspex% echo foo\
	bar
	foo bar
	auspex% echo 'foo\
	bar'
	foo
	bar
	auspex%

so I suspect the only "real" S5 "csh", namely the one coming in S5R4
which will be derived from, I suspect, the SunOS 4.1 one (since that one
should, last I heard, not use the 8th bit of characters for quoting),
may do the same thing.

tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) (10/22/89)

In article <2551@auspex.auspex.com> guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) writes:
>Well, AT&T didn't supply "csh" with S3, nor with any S5 release prior to
>S5R4, so "system 5 and system 3" really means "somebody's S3-based and
>S5-based releases, with a 'csh' from somewhere".  

AT&T 6386E running Sys V/386 3.2 out of the box:

	$ what /bin/csh
	/bin/csh:
		/bin/csh.sl 1.1 3.2 06/24/88 63059 AT&T-SF

-- 
"Take off your engineering hat   | "The filter has      | Tom Neff
and put on your management hat." | discreting sources." | tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET

guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) (10/24/89)

>AT&T 6386E running Sys V/386 3.2 out of the box:
>
>	$ what /bin/csh
>	/bin/csh:
>		/bin/csh.sl 1.1 3.2 06/24/88 63059 AT&T-SF

Hmmm.  If they put it in for Xenix compatibility, perhaps it's the same
one that's in Xenix; is that one of the really horrible old creaky ones
that hasn't been properly stamped out?  (At least it'll probably be
stamped out in S5R4, and replaced with a proper 4.3BSD-or-later vintage
one.)