Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!noao!ncar!gatech!udel!mmdf
From: burgess%creek.decnet@hqhsd.brooks.af.mil (CREEK::BURGESS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: RE: shell bug
Message-ID: <57452@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Date: 28 Jun 91 14:33:18 GMT
Sender: mmdf@ee.udel.edu
Lines: 29

Quoting: Paul Allen <paula%BCSAIC.UUCP@VM1.NoDak.EDU>
>The shell still complained about a syntax error.  But if I wrote:
>
>	for n in $@
>	do
>	  whatever
>	done
>
>or:
>
>	for n in $@ ; do
>	  whatever
>	done
>
>it worked fine.  This looks like a bug to me.  I didn't spend
>any time trying to fix it, 'cause it was so much easier to just
>patch Configure.  :-)
>
>Has anybody seen this bug?  

Yup, I ran across it last Saturday doing something similar.  I also came up 
with the same two workarounds.  After I get done upgradeing to 1.5 and 
porting PERL (deja vu) for my boss ('by the hour' type work), I am going to 
look into shell and find out if the 'do' operator can be allowed on the 'for' 
line, unless it has been fixed :-)...

TSgt Dave Burgess
Armstrong Lab
Brooks AFB, TX