On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:48:50 +0200 Elias Pipping wrote:
> is passing SHELL=/bin/sh to bin/package something that's supposed to
> work in all cases by the way?
> Because
> bin/package make ast-ksh SHELL=/bin/sh
did you mean "test" instead of "make" here?
> yields errors like this one for me:
> ++ regress
> /var/tmp/paludis/build/app-shells-ksh-2010.08.11/work/src/cmd/INIT/mamake.tst
> mamake
> ./regress: line 228: syntax error near unexpected token `('
> ./regress: line 228: ` !($KEEP)) j="$j $i" ;;'
> running regress through /bin/ksh works but running it through /bin/sh
> does not. /bin/ksh cannot be assumed to exist on the system one is
> testing on and using the ksh one just built for testing that very
> version of ksh doesn't sound like a good idea. So that script should
> work with /bin/sh, no?
in a previous post I said
many of the ast regression tests assume the ast-open package
this includes assuming the latest ksh for running the test scripts
there is a point past which the extra effort for portability is much
more work for little more advantage -- we've gone down that path with
the bin/package script, and that has pushed the limits of our sanity
in this case the utility of the regress script is due to the use of
ksh93 features in coding it
_______________________________________________
ast-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
