GNU bug report logs - #46351
28.0.50; Add convenient way to bypass Eshell's own pipelining

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
Cc: 46351 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, michael.albinus <at> gmx.de
Subject: bug#46351: 28.0.50; Add convenient way to bypass Eshell's own pipelining
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:45:07 +0200

> From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:19:59 -0700
> 
> I've got it working.  Please let me know what you think of the attached.

Thanks.

I see you play some games with shell syntactic rules and such: IME,
these are often tricky enough to defeat simplistic handling.  For
example, does this support commands that have redirection operators
_before_ the first verb?  It's allowed in every shell I've seen,
albeit very rarely used.

I think Robert found another possible issue.

> +(cl-macrolet
> +    ((deftest (name input expected)
> +       (let ((result (gensym)))
> +         `(ert-deftest ,name ()
> +            (let* ((shell-file-name "sh") (shell-command-switch "-c")
> +                   (,result
> +                    (with-temp-eshell (eshell-parse-command ,input))))
> +              ;; Strip `eshell-trap-errors'.
> +              (should (equal (cadr ,result) ,expected)))))))
> +
> +  (deftest em-extpipe-test-1
> +           "foo *| bar >baz"
> +           '(eshell-named-command "sh"
> +                                  (list "-c" "foo | bar >baz")))

Why do these tests only look for 'sh' as the shell?  What is the
importance of the shell for this purpose?

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.