GNU bug report logs - #59622
29.0.50; [PATCH] Regression in Eshell's handling of escaped newlines

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2022 00:38:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Found in version 29.0.50

Done: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #14 received at 59622 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 59622 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#59622: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Regression in Eshell's handling of
 escaped newlines
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2022 09:26:04 +0200
> Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2022 17:41:50 -0800
> From: Jim Porter <jporterbugs <at> gmail.com>
> 
> On 11/26/2022 4:36 PM, Jim Porter wrote:
> > Starting from "emacs -Q -f eshell":
> > 
> >    # Emacs 28
> >    ~ $ echo foo\
> >    bar
> > 
> >    foobar
> > 
> >    # Emacs 29
> >    ~ $ echo foo\
> >    bar
> > 
> >    foo
> >    bar
> > 
> > That is, Emacs 28 used to treat escaped newlines in the way you'd expect 
> > from other shells: it expands to the empty string. Now in Emacs 29, it 
> > inserts a literal newline.
> 
> Eli, since this is a regression from Emacs 28 (likely fallout from one 
> of my changes to fix some longstanding bugs with quotes in Eshell), 
> would my current patch be ok on the release branch?

Yes, but please do try to make it as safe as is feasible.

> I can try to minimize the changes a bit further (I slightly refactored
> 'eshell-parse-backslash' to reduce repetition), but since it has unit
> tests, I think it should be pretty safe either way.

OK.




This bug report was last modified 2 years and 161 days ago.

Previous Next


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