Re: Exclude non-executables from command completion

[Eike von Seggern <jan.eike.von.seggern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:27 +0100, Peter Stephenson wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:08:26 +0200
> Eike von Seggern <eikevons@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Is it possible, that command completion only completes on commands that
> > are actually executable? As it happens I have to work on machines that
> > have non-executables in directories in $PATH.
> 
> I'm not sure why we don't check that commands are executables, was there
> ever a reason?
> 
> P.S. we are woefully dependent on PATH_MAX.  That's one of those things it
> would be really good to fix that's not going to change without a ten-fold
> increase in people working on the shell.
 
Hi Peter,

I've had a look in the current HEAD version of hashtable.c, though I
have not compiled and tried it hands-on. But if I'm right, only
regular&&executable files are added to the hashtable. At least on my
Debian system, there are a lot of symlinks in /usr/bin to keep track of
different versions. So I think you should keep symlinks in mind, aswell.
If that's already the case, sorry for this, but my libc knowledge is
really small.

Cheers,
    eike