From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jul 13  9:31:29 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7388714ECD
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com)
Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com)
	by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1)
	id 1145RR-0007tX-00; Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:30:01 +0200
From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
To: Oliver Fromme <olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de>
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: bin/12578: `` subshell taints PWD 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:13:42 +0200."
             <199907131613.SAA09770@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> 
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:30:01 +0200
Message-ID: <30350.931883401@axl.noc.iafrica.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:13:42 +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote:

> Command substitution certainly has to spawn a subshell, even
> for built-in commands, because otherwise you could modify
> parent shell variables within command substitutions.

But isn't that exactly what's happening here, where PWD is being tainted
by the commands evaluated within the substitution?

Ciao,
Sheldon.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message