[bug #66568] document whether find's -execdir option is guaranteed to produce pathnames that start with ./

Christoph Anton Mitterer <[email protected]> Mon, 16 Dec 2024 20:53:25 -0500 (EST)

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.gnu.findutils.bugs
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

URL:
  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66568>

                 Summary: document whether find's -execdir option is
guaranteed to produce pathnames that start with ./
                   Group: findutils
               Submitter: calestyo
               Submitted: Tue 17 Dec 2024 01:53:21 AM UTC
                Category: None
                Severity: 3 - Normal
              Item Group: None
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
         Originator Name:
        Originator Email:
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
                 Release: None
           Fixed Release: None


    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comments:


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue 17 Dec 2024 01:53:21 AM UTC By: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo>
Hey.

I hope I haven't just overlooked it, but it's seems that it's not specified
whether or not the pathnames generated by -execdir are guaranteed to start
with `./`.

For -exec, POSIX defines that the resulting pathnames are (simplified)
prefixed with their respective starting point, but -execdir is not POSIX and
one cannot really apply the general rules for -execdir, as that obviously
needs to give pathnames relative to the respective directory.

The current implementation seems to do so, i.e. it always generates relative
pathnames that start with ./ but that doesn't seem to be "promised" to ever
stay that way.

Would be nice if that could be mentioned, because then one can be sure that
pathnames from -execdir cannot be mistaken as options (at least not with
commands, that don't treat arguments that start with ./ as option).


Thanks,
Chris.







    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66568>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 228 B)