On Mar 20, 2018, at 4:07 AM, R. Diez wrote:
>
> I know that Autoconf developers want to write extremely portable scripts. But
> that is a huge barrier for somebody like me. I am a user, not a shell expert.
Your argument attempts to have it both ways: Bourne and POSIX
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018, Russell Shaw wrote:
If autoconf'd programs required the end users to have an installation-shell
that is ported to all systems of interest, then the learning requirements of
autoconf users should be a lot less.
This has all been discussed many times before. If it had
On 20/03/18 22:53, Russell Shaw wrote:
On 20/03/18 21:07, R. Diez wrote:
...
Requiring a POSIX shell in the next version is an improvement, but POSIX is
too limiting to really help. It is 2018. No wonder so many people want to
ditch Autoconf!
Autoconf is hard to learn because becoming
On 20/03/18 21:07, R. Diez wrote:
...
Requiring a POSIX shell in the next version is an improvement, but POSIX is too
limiting to really help. It is 2018. No wonder so many people want to ditch
Autoconf!
Autoconf is hard to learn because becoming properly familiar with shell
programming
I saw in the recent Automake release notes that there’s a tentative plan that
Autoconf 2.0 will require at least a POSIX shell.
Herr Diez, is this close enough to “Bash” to suit your purposes?
That is, are you just looking for things like $() instead of ``, > or are you
intending to commit
On Mar 19, 2018, at 7:57 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> On 03/18/2018 10:39 AM, R. Diez wrote:
>> I realise that this decision goes against Autoconf's portability principle.
>> But even as a humble user, I am entitled to some freedom of choice. 8-)
>
> Not any easy way that I
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018, R. Diez wrote:
I realise that this decision goes against Autoconf's portability principle.
But even as a humble user, I am entitled to some freedom of choice. 8-)
I could write some code in configure.ac to detect the current shell. But is
there any way to tell Autoconf
On 03/18/2018 10:39 AM, R. Diez wrote:
I realise that this decision goes against Autoconf's portability
principle. But even as a humble user, I am entitled to some freedom of
choice. 8-)
I could write some code in configure.ac to detect the current shell. But
is there any way to tell
Hi all:
I find it hard to write POSIX-compliant shell scripts. The lack of the
'pipefail' flag is specially problematic. I have described this issue here:
http://rdiez.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Error_Handling_in_General_and_C%2B%2B_Exceptions_in_Particular#Set_the_pipefail_flag
Therefore, I write