Re: checks/scripts / checkbashsims updates
"Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes:
> On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 09:07 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes:
>>> Sorry to be a pain, but we've tightened this further in svn to
>>>
>>> '(?<![\$\(])\(\(.*\)\)'
>>>
>>> so as not to match constructs such as
>>>
>>> progress_size=$(((100 - $PROGRESS_STATE) / 3))
>> What *is* this construct trying to catch, anyway? dash supports things
>> like $((4 + 5)), and if the above is also okay, I'm not sure when this
>> would not be a false positive.
> So far as I can tell, it's intended to be catching use of (( as a
> synonym for let, instead of $((, for performing arithmetic expansion.
> (The accompanying comment simply says "(( should be $((".)
Oh! I get it. There's also a weird varient for syntax in bash that uses
the same thing.
Okay, updating the lintian regex now.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: