2

I'm just reviewing How does VARIABLE=() { function definition } work in bash. It was posted before the vulnerability. Neither the question, nor the answer, nor any comment in the whole thread mentions anything about Shellshock. There's also no Bash version mentioned anywhere. So in today's reality this Q&A is out of space. Still, historically it's valuable. Now, the question is what to do with such threads?

  1. Answer it with state of the art details and with a background in history.
  2. Update the question and include the history.
  3. Just comment under the question.
  4. Mark it somehow - how? A special tag? Title edit?
  5. Close it with appropriate radio button option - this would be a feature request to SE I guess.
  6. Something still different. What?
1
  • 1
    I'd go for the first option if I felt strongly about it. In the past I have also left comments on the accepted answers when I felt that this was enough.
    – Kusalananda Mod
    Jan 26 '18 at 11:05
2

I went for #2 and edited the question adding to it this warning at the top:

WARNING - this question is about the Bash before the shellshock vulnerability, due to which it was changed.

Here's the question again: How does VARIABLE=() { function definition } work in bash

1
  • I think this was a good compromise.
    – Kusalananda Mod
    Jan 28 '18 at 13:55
1

My instinct would be #3 -- leave a comment under the question, if anything. Stack Exchange posts are timestamped, so visitors could determine the timeline of the question, answers, and the Shellshock timeline to see what's relevant.

You must log in to answer this question.