Debian Bug report logs - #430501
/etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>

To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 23:58:31 -0700

Package: bash
Version: 3.1dfsg-8
Severity: wishlist
File: /etc/skel/.bashrc

bash_completion defines a variable $BASH_COMPLETION.  I use the following on
my ~/.bashrc, used on many systems, some of which enable bash_completion by
default in the system bash initialization files and some of which do not:

if [ -z "$BASH_COMPLETION" ] && [ -f /etc/bash_completion ]; then
    . /etc/bash_completion
fi

This includes /etc/bash_completion only if available and not already included.

- Josh Triplett

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-rc1 (PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages bash depends on:
ii  base-files                    4.0.0      Debian base system miscellaneous f
ii  debianutils                   2.21       Miscellaneous utilities specific t
ii  libc6                         2.5-11     GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libncurses5                   5.6-3      Shared libraries for terminal hand

bash recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

Message #16 received at 430501@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: 430501@bugs.debian.org, 430501-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Debian Bug Tracking System <control@bugs.debian.org>

Subject: Re: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 12:00:17 +0200

reassign 430501 bash-completion
thanks

I think that's the wrong thing to do. Resourcing the .bashrc should include all 
parts. if bash-completion is not safe to resource, please have a guard in 
bash-completion instead.

Message #26 received at 430501@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

Cc: 430501@bugs.debian.org, 430501-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 12:12:51 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 10 April 2010 12:00:17, Matthias Klose wrote:
> reassign 430501 bash-completion
> thanks
> 
> I think that's the wrong thing to do. Resourcing the .bashrc should include
>  all parts. if bash-completion is not safe to resource, please have a guard
>  in bash-completion instead.

What's wrong with:

[ -f /etc/bash_completion ] && . /etc/bash_completion

?

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|----
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #34 received at 430501@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

To: David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>

Cc: 430501@bugs.debian.org, 430501-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:16:29 +0200

On 10.04.2010 12:12, David Paleino wrote:
> On Saturday 10 April 2010 12:00:17, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> reassign 430501 bash-completion
>> thanks
>>
>> I think that's the wrong thing to do. Resourcing the .bashrc should include
>>   all parts. if bash-completion is not safe to resource, please have a guard
>>   in bash-completion instead.
>
> What's wrong with:
>
> [ -f /etc/bash_completion ]&&  . /etc/bash_completion
>
> ?

if that does work, then nothing is wrong. what do you think is wrong?

Message #42 received at 430501-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>

To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

Cc: 430501-done@bugs.debian.org, 430501-submitter@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#430501: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:20:19 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 10 April 2010 13:16:29, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 10.04.2010 12:12, David Paleino wrote:
> > On Saturday 10 April 2010 12:00:17, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >> reassign 430501 bash-completion
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> I think that's the wrong thing to do. Resourcing the .bashrc should
> >> include all parts. if bash-completion is not safe to resource, please
> >> have a guard in bash-completion instead.
> >
> > What's wrong with:
> >
> > [ -f /etc/bash_completion ]&&  . /etc/bash_completion
> >
> > ?
> 
> if that does work, then nothing is wrong. what do you think is wrong?

Nothing, and I can't see why we should check for BASH_COMPLETION whatsoever 
(re the original bugreport).

Closing the bug,
David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|----
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #50 received at 430501@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>

To: David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>, 430501@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Bug#430501: /etc/skel/.bashrc: bash_completion example in default .bashrc should check for previous inclusion via $BASH_COMPLETION

Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:40:34 -0700

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 01:20:19PM +0200, David Paleino wrote:
> On Saturday 10 April 2010 13:16:29, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > On 10.04.2010 12:12, David Paleino wrote:
> > > On Saturday 10 April 2010 12:00:17, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > >> reassign 430501 bash-completion
> > >> thanks
> > >>
> > >> I think that's the wrong thing to do. Resourcing the .bashrc should
> > >> include all parts. if bash-completion is not safe to resource, please
> > >> have a guard in bash-completion instead.
> > >
> > > What's wrong with:
> > >
> > > [ -f /etc/bash_completion ]&&  . /etc/bash_completion
> > >
> > > ?
> > 
> > if that does work, then nothing is wrong. what do you think is wrong?
> 
> Nothing, and I can't see why we should check for BASH_COMPLETION whatsoever 
> (re the original bugreport).

I don't see anything in /etc/bash_completion that prevents sourcing it
twice, and even if it works idempotently, that wastes a lot of time.  I
suggested checking for duplicate sourcing via $BASH_COMPLETION so that
if both ~/.bashrc and /etc/bash.bashrc source /etc/bash_completion, it
doesn't run twice and take twice as long.  I do agree that
/etc/bash_completion seems like a better place to put this check, but I
think *something* should check rather than duplicating work.

- Josh Triplett

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.