RE: Report of use of "local" per t0000-basic.sh

From: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2019, 15:41 UTC
Message-ID: <000d01d5a3a6$d454e610$7cfeb230$@nexbridge.com>
In-Reply-To: <20191123041616.GD6430@camp.crustytoothpaste.net>

On November 22, 2019 11:16 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:

> Is there some place in particular that you've found we're using it outside of a
> function?  I don't know about others, but I'm certainly interested in fixing
> these.  It looks like we do use it in a function in
> t0000 itself, though.

I have been checking more deeply into this. The "local" keyword is being interpreted as a program instead of a keyword on the default shell on z/OS V2R3 USS even in functions. There are two shells, something resembling ksh and another tcsh. Tests do not run at all in tcsh (no support for . file). The ksh does not implement "local", so no option there. There is a bash port available, which supports local, but subtest 43 (tests clean up even on failures) does not work, although subtest 1 does work. To make any of this work, I have had to modify the tests to explicitly tag created files as ISO8859-1 (touch file && chtag -c ISO8859-1) because by default IBM-1047 is used (filesystem configured default), and test_cmp simply does not like IBM-1047 format.