From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=210.71.195.41; helo=out01.hibox.biz; envelope-from=tim.lewis@insyde.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from out01.hibox.biz (out01.hibox.biz [210.71.195.41]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F381C21CEB127 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 12:10:27 -0700 (PDT) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A2AZAgBTju9Z/ws0GKxaGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg19kbiePDZApJjEBgwKVFwoYC4USBAIChGBDFQECAQEBAQEBAWs?= =?us-ascii?q?ohR0BAQEBAwEBBgIwHAgQCwwBAwIGAw0EBAEBKAcZDgERDQkIAgQBEgsFihAQq?= =?us-ascii?q?iAhAosAAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGwWDLoNXgh2Cdop6BZFQgROPCgKCMYU?= =?us-ascii?q?yhweGCYIViW4NhxWVf4E5NSKBW3pegmRKhDUgNotxAQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.43,429,1503331200"; d="scan'208";a="15925135" Received: from unknown (HELO hb3-BKT201.hibox.biz) ([172.24.52.11]) by out01.hibox.biz with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2017 03:14:09 +0800 Received: from unknown (HELO hb3-BKT101.hibox.biz) ([172.24.51.11]) by hb3-BKT201.hibox.biz with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2017 03:14:08 +0800 Received: from unknown (HELO hb3-IN04.hibox.biz) ([172.24.12.14]) by hb3-BKT101.hibox.biz with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2017 03:14:09 +0800 X-Remote-IP: 73.116.1.175 X-Remote-Host: c-73-116-1-175.hsd1.ca.comcast.net X-SBRS: -10.0 X-MID: 7876927 X-Auth-ID: tim.lewis@insyde.com X-EnvelopeFrom: tim.lewis@insyde.com hiBox-Sender: 1 Received: from c-73-116-1-175.hsd1.ca.comcast.net (HELO DESKTOPAVHFBJF) ([73.116.1.175]) by hb3-IN04.hibox.biz with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 25 Oct 2017 03:14:07 +0800 From: "Tim Lewis" To: "'Carsey, Jaben'" , , "'Ni, Ruiyu'" Cc: References: <4d26cd8872634973b7d38388dc5a0d20@ausx13mps335.AMER.DELL.COM> In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 12:14:03 -0700 Message-ID: <2b4e01d34cfc$43312480$c9936d80$@insyde.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-index: AQJ1aRlC6YzJLPGyZ4LAZNl8pPl/pwHTg81hoaCKFwA= Subject: Re: Shell Non-conformity to the Spec X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 19:10:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-language: en-us Jaben -- Wasn't there are previous e-mail thread about this? Tim -----Original Message----- From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Carsey, Jaben Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:29 AM To: Jim.Dailey@dell.com; Ni, Ruiyu Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: Re: [edk2] Shell Non-conformity to the Spec Yes. > -----Original Message----- > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of > Jim.Dailey@dell.com > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 11:20 AM > To: Carsey, Jaben ; Ni, Ruiyu > > Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org > Subject: [edk2] Shell Non-conformity to the Spec > Importance: High > > The shell spec says that "Each environment variable has a > case-sensitive name ...". > > In the EfiShellSetEnv function of ShellProtocol.c a case-insensitive > compare is performed against the variable that is to be set to see if > it is one of the read-only variables. That means one cannot set a > variable named, for example, CWD, even though "cwd" and "CWD" are two > different variable names according to the spec. > > Should this be changed to a case-sensitive comparison? > > Regards, > Jim > > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel