On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Willie Wong wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 09:28:57AM +0200, Penguin Lover Rumen Yotov 
squawked:
> > >You're welcome. What I'd like to know is in which universe portage
> > > could block bash <puzzled>
> > >
> > >It just sounds a bit daft, sort of like OpenOffice blocking
> > > mutt...
> >
> > Thinking about it, much of portage is bash-scripts, no.
> > Maybe some portage features depend on newer bash functions, just
> > guessing. HTH. Rumen
>
> See bgo#196278 and the bash changelog
>  http://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/bash/COMPAT
> In particular point 29 about handling of the % character in parameter
> replacement.
>
> In short, bash changes behaviour (another one is how special
> characters in regexp inside a test is dealt with; that one bit me
> personally). 

OK, that now makes a lot of sense, thanks.

> Rather than coding portage to switch function/variable 
> definitions based on bash version, 

which would be disgustingly ugly :-)

> the portage devs feel that it is 
> easier to just make it depend on the newer version of bash.

Yes, a very sane decision


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Reply via email to