Обсуждение: pg_ctl failure with older Bourne shells (use ${1:+"$@"})
Your name : Mike Coleman
Your email address : mkc@mathdogs.com
System Configuration
---------------------
Architecture (example: Intel Pentium) :alpha
Operating System (example: Linux 2.0.26 ELF) :Tru64 5.1
PostgreSQL version (example: PostgreSQL-7.2.1): PostgreSQL-7.2.1
Compiler used (example: gcc 2.95.2) :gcc 3.1
Please enter a FULL description of your problem:
------------------------------------------------
The pg_ctl script uses the "$@" construct. Newer shells will replace
this with nothing if $@ is empty, but older shells will not. The
alternate form in the patch below will work for both new and old
shells.
Please describe a way to repeat the problem. Please try to provide a
concise reproducible example, if at all possible:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The problem occurs with this command, for example:
$ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl -D /data1/postgres-0 -l logfile start
If you know how this problem might be fixed, list the solution below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--- /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl.dist 2002-07-18 11:34:25.000000000 -0500
+++ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl 2002-07-18 14:44:35.000000000 -0500
@@ -332,12 +332,12 @@
fi
if [ -n "$logfile" ]; then
- "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
+ "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
else
# when starting without log file, redirect stderr to stdout, so
# pg_ctl can be invoked with >$logfile and still have pg_ctl's
# stderr on the terminal.
- "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null 2>&1 &
+ "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null 2>&1 &
fi
# if had an old lockfile, check to see if we were able to start
Yes, I have seen this fix before. Are people still using shells that
don't handle "$@" properly? I guess so or you wouldn't have reported
it.
We only use "$@" in a few places so I am applying this patch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Coleman wrote:
> Your name : Mike Coleman
> Your email address : mkc@mathdogs.com
>
>
> System Configuration
> ---------------------
> Architecture (example: Intel Pentium) :alpha
>
> Operating System (example: Linux 2.0.26 ELF) :Tru64 5.1
>
> PostgreSQL version (example: PostgreSQL-7.2.1): PostgreSQL-7.2.1
>
> Compiler used (example: gcc 2.95.2) :gcc 3.1
>
>
> Please enter a FULL description of your problem:
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> The pg_ctl script uses the "$@" construct. Newer shells will replace
> this with nothing if $@ is empty, but older shells will not. The
> alternate form in the patch below will work for both new and old
> shells.
>
>
> Please describe a way to repeat the problem. Please try to provide a
> concise reproducible example, if at all possible:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The problem occurs with this command, for example:
>
> $ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl -D /data1/postgres-0 -l logfile start
>
>
>
>
> If you know how this problem might be fixed, list the solution below:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --- /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl.dist 2002-07-18 11:34:25.000000000 -0500
> +++ /usr/local/pgsql/bin/pg_ctl 2002-07-18 14:44:35.000000000 -0500
> @@ -332,12 +332,12 @@
> fi
>
> if [ -n "$logfile" ]; then
> - "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
> + "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
> else
> # when starting without log file, redirect stderr to stdout, so
> # pg_ctl can be invoked with >$logfile and still have pg_ctl's
> # stderr on the terminal.
> - "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null 2>&1 &
> + "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null 2>&1 &
> fi
>
> # if had an old lockfile, check to see if we were able to start
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Index: src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.sh
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.sh,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -c -r1.25 pg_ctl.sh
*** src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.sh 29 Sep 2001 03:09:32 -0000 1.25
--- src/bin/pg_ctl/pg_ctl.sh 19 Jul 2002 13:48:21 -0000
***************
*** 332,343 ****
fi
if [ -n "$logfile" ]; then
! "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
else
# when starting without log file, redirect stderr to stdout, so
# pg_ctl can be invoked with >$logfile and still have pg_ctl's
# stderr on the terminal.
! "$po_path" "$@" </dev/null 2>&1 &
fi
# if had an old lockfile, check to see if we were able to start
--- 332,343 ----
fi
if [ -n "$logfile" ]; then
! "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null >>$logfile 2>&1 &
else
# when starting without log file, redirect stderr to stdout, so
# pg_ctl can be invoked with >$logfile and still have pg_ctl's
# stderr on the terminal.
! "$po_path" ${1:+"$@"} </dev/null 2>&1 &
fi
# if had an old lockfile, check to see if we were able to start
Index: src/bin/pgaccess/main.tcl
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/bin/pgaccess/main.tcl,v
retrieving revision 1.6
diff -c -r1.6 main.tcl
*** src/bin/pgaccess/main.tcl 2 Jul 2002 06:11:23 -0000 1.6
--- src/bin/pgaccess/main.tcl 19 Jul 2002 13:48:22 -0000
***************
*** 1,6 ****
#!/bin/sh
# the next line restarts using wish \
! exec wish "$0" "$@"
image create bitmap dnarw -data {
#define down_arrow_width 15
--- 1,6 ----
#!/bin/sh
# the next line restarts using wish \
! exec wish "$0" ${1:+"$@"}
image create bitmap dnarw -data {
#define down_arrow_width 15
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Yes, I have seen this fix before. Are people still using shells that
> don't handle "$@" properly? I guess so or you wouldn't have reported
> it.
I remember having submitted just such a patch a few years ago (for a
different one of our scripts of course) when I was still using HPUX 9.
I'm not sure if later HPUXen have better shells. Plain /bin/sh on this
platform is ancient.
> We only use "$@" in a few places so I am applying this patch.
Could you check for other scripts where the same thing may have snuck
in?
BTW, O'Reilly's "Unix Power Tools" recommends
${1+"$@"}
as the most portable replacement for "$@". Mike's version has :+
which is not the same. My man page for the Bourne shell says
${parameter:+word}
If parameter is set and is non-null, substitute word;
otherwise substitute nothing.
...
If the colon (:) is omitted from the above expressions, the shell only
checks whether parameter is set or not.
It looks to me like the book's method is more correct --- it won't mess
up in the case where $1 has been explicitly given as "".
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
> > We only use "$@" in a few places so I am applying this patch.
>
> Could you check for other scripts where the same thing may have snuck
> in?
Yes, I checked, and I saw pgaccess using it too. I sent them a patch.
>
> BTW, O'Reilly's "Unix Power Tools" recommends
> ${1+"$@"}
> as the most portable replacement for "$@". Mike's version has :+
> which is not the same. My man page for the Bourne shell says
Changed.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Blah. Yeah, I muffed that--don't use a colon.
Regarding Bruce's comment, you wouldn't think they're still around, but thi=
s is what /bin/sh does on Tru64 5.1. (5.1 is almost the latest version; th=
ere's a 5.1a.)
Mike
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 9:38 AM
> To: Bruce Momjian
> Cc: Coleman, Michael; pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org; mkc@mathdogs.com
> Subject: Re: [BUGS] pg_ctl failure with older Bourne shells (use
> ${1:+"$@"})=20
>=20
>=20
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Yes, I have seen this fix before. Are people still using=20
> shells that
> > don't handle "$@" properly? I guess so or you wouldn't=20
> have reported
> > it.
>=20
> I remember having submitted just such a patch a few years ago (for a
> different one of our scripts of course) when I was still using HPUX 9.
> I'm not sure if later HPUXen have better shells. Plain=20
> /bin/sh on this
> platform is ancient.
>=20
> > We only use "$@" in a few places so I am applying this patch.
>=20
> Could you check for other scripts where the same thing may have snuck
> in?
>=20
> BTW, O'Reilly's "Unix Power Tools" recommends
> ${1+"$@"}
> as the most portable replacement for "$@". Mike's version has :+
> which is not the same. My man page for the Bourne shell says
>=20
> ${parameter:+word}
> If parameter is set and is non-null,=20
> substitute word;
> otherwise substitute nothing.
>=20
> ...
>=20
> If the colon (:) is omitted from the above expressions,=20
> the shell only
> checks whether parameter is set or not.
>=20
> It looks to me like the book's method is more correct --- it=20
> won't mess
> up in the case where $1 has been explicitly given as "".
>=20
> regards, tom lane
>=20