Re: [Duplicity-talk] bash completion for duplicity

[edgar . soldin]

On 7/1/2018 21:43, Jozef Riha wrote:
> hello,
> 
> gpl header is now added to the file. regarding the first point.. i compiled 
> bash3 3.2.48 released in 2009 and ran the following test:
> 
> cur="-foo"; [[ "$cur" == -* ]] && echo bar
> 
> ran fine and so did its legacy version:
> 
> cur="-foo"; if echo "$cur" | grep -q "^-"; then echo bar ; fi

yeah regex extended test [[ came w/ bash3

> the latest bash2 release is from 2002 and probably full of security bugs so i 
> wonder whether we really want to be that much backward compatible.

let's try if possible. i'd say that case worked with globbing at that time 
already. so why not do it like

cur="-foo"; case "$cur" in -*) echo bar ;; esac

?

> btw zsh (as shell of my choice) completion file would be greatly appreciated 
> as well :-)

better than noting i suppose, so no objections here.. ede/duply.net
 
> kind regards,
> 
> jose
> 
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Kenneth Loafman <address@hidden 
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> 
>     We're under GPL v2, so yes, please stick a header on it.
> 
>     Guess I don't make a good detective.  😊  Ah well.
> 
>     ...Ken
>       
> 
>     On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:27 AM Jose Riha <address@hidden 
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> 
>         btw. i've contacted the author of the script. reply:
>         https://twitter.com/mikeyneuling/status/1011917702057766912 
> <https://twitter.com/mikeyneuling/status/1011917702057766912>
> 
>         j
> 
>         On Wed, 27 Jun 2018, edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk wrote:
> 
>         > yeah,
>         >
>         > would have to be implemented cleanly of course. see no disadvantage 
> though in having command line parameters parsed earliest.
>         >
>         > but it's all rhetorical anyway as long as nobody implements 
> argparse first ;).. ede/duply.net <http://duply.net>
>         >
>         > On 26.06.2018 21:10, Kenneth Loafman wrote:
>         >> Reading through the docs, it wants to execute duplicity during the 
> autocomplete to get the options, and leave no side effects.  That could be 
> problematic.
>         >>
>         >> ...Ken
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 7:54 AM edgar.soldin--- via Duplicity-talk 
> <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden> <mailto:address@hidden 
> <mailto:address@hidden>>> wrote:
>         >>
>         >>     On 26.06.2018 14:49, Aaron wrote:
>         >>     > Without digging into the detail, this:
>         >>     > http://argcomplete.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ 
> <http://argcomplete.readthedocs.io/en/latest/>
>         >>     > apparently automatically collects options for bash 
> completion from argparse, which feels like a sensible approach.
>         >>     >
>         >>     > Moving from Optparse to Argparse is on the roadmap already 
> anyway:
>         >>     > https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/1480565 
> <https://bugs.launchpad.net/duplicity/+bug/1480565>
>         >>
>         >>
>         >>     agreed, this approach looks much cleaner than a manually 
> maintained list of options.. ede/duply.net <http://duply.net> 
> <http://duply.net>
>         >>
>         >>     _______________________________________________
>         >>     Duplicity-talk mailing list
>         >>    address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden> <mailto:address@hidden 
> <mailto:address@hidden>>
>         >>     https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk 
> <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk>
>         >>
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Duplicity-talk mailing list
>         > address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>         > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk 
> <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/duplicity-talk>
> 
> 
>