On Jun 12, 2023, at 1:35 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 10 Jun 2023 11:29:36 -0700 > Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > >> On Jun 9, 2023, at 2:47 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer >> <rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> But well. Either way, what >>> should we do about remote env, if there is one? If the target >>> supports it, send it and skip otherwise? > >> So, to focus a >> conversation, which target, which host, canadian? Which part of the >> environment? What part is missing you want to fix? Want to unify >> between targets... and so on. >> > > The most recent target where this came up again was GCN i think. > See the last block in > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/20230508195217.4897009f@nbbrfq/ > and Thomas' reference therein to Tobias' > https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc-patches/018bcdeb-b3bb-1859-cd0b-a8a92e26d...@codesourcery.com/ > > thoughts?
I kinds like the remote_setenv approach, but the low level details when one gets in there and wires up all they need to make it work are important. If someone wants to tilt at the problem, I'm inclined to let them find the incantation they like and approve it. I'd rather approve a patch that takes us a step closer to perfection then go another 10 years. For quoting. I like quite using ' if there is no ' in the string. For each ' in the string, replace it with '\'', inelegant, but easier to reason about and don't have to worry about as many meta characters if you try and go the "" route. This assumes something like sh is taking in commands. This isn't always the case. One can canadian into a windows box or some other weird thing so the mechanism used has to be next to the thing that knows what it is talking to. Just because someone contributes code for talking to sh, doesn't mean they have to bother with windows or other weird stuff. The next person to come along can tilt at that.
