Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Tim Post dijo [Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 05:26:58PM +0800]:
>
>> Hi Gunnar,
>>
>> I should have noted:
>>
>>
>>> Is the -n switch to echo now considered safe?
>>>
>> As opposed to printf "%s\t" "$foo", which exists in all modern shells
>> including dash, which is fully POSIX compliant and the default sh
>> interpreter on many.
>>
>
> Ok, I was not aware of this issue - I'm fixing it for our next
> upload. I have removed all the bashisms I was aware of, and of course,
> I do share this portability goal you mention. Change committed.
>
>
>> Yes, its nit picking :) Also, the LSB app checker (which I love) will
>> flag warnings if you define your own functions as work-arounds if the
>> standard LSB init scripts are not present. So something like:
>>
>> . /lib/lsb/.. || {
>> foo() {
>> ...
>> ...
>> }
>> }
>>
>> ... might be better. While this will raise flags in the app checker, it
>> guarantees a working script on appliances which are often sparse and not
>> LSB compliant.
>>
>
> Well, in my specific case, I'll leave as it is, as I can trust
> /lib/lsb/init-functions to be present in every Debian-based system (it
> is in the required lsb-base package). Of course, if you want to
> enhance the script and conditionally provide those functions, I won't
> object!
>
>
>> Likewise, telling zsh to emulate sh will also raise a flag. However, we
>> have no idea what /bin/sh actually points to on a user's machine and we
>> want the script to work :) If they have an agreeable compiler, it should
>> 'just work' :) While we hope 'sh' is the POSIX compliant invocation of
>> the shell, its not always the case.
>>
>
> Again, I have the benefit of simplification. I can _know_ that /bin/sh
> points to a POSIX shell. Of course, /bin/sh is (with us) a symlink, so
> FWIW an administrator could point it to whatever he wants... But I can
> just trust it to be a POSIX shell.
>
>
>> Its better to have one that works everywhere, no?
>>
>
> I strongly agree with you. However, unless you give me an example not
> taken out of a dizzy administrator doing things backwards, I think we
> can keep some assumptions in place ;-)
>
> Greetings,
>
>
Can You please include pkg-config to Build-Depends so the next
ubuntu merge get fixed this :
https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cherokee/+bug/301305
Thank You
Leonel
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.octality.com/listinfo/cherokee
