>>>>> Hamish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> FWIW all known bashisms were removed prior to GRASS 6.2.2.
> ...
>>> Anything left needing bash explicitly uses #!/bin/bash
>> I. e., `i.spectral', `r.mapcalculator', `r.tileset' and
>> `v.in.gps.babel'? Could someone please point me to the list of the
>> identified Shell portability issues of these scripts?
> $ grep -rI 'bin/bash' scripts/* | cut -f1 -d: | grep -v '/.svn/'
BTW, you can use `-l' instead of `cut', e. g.:
$ grep -rlI 'bin/bash' scripts/* | grep -v '/.svn/'
> scripts/i.spectral/i.spectral
> variable arrays are bash specific: ${COORD[$i]}
> I am not sure if this is ok or not: $( cat "$TMP1") ?
Completely. See, e. g.:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html#tag_02_06_03
Furthermore, I'd recommend the $(...) form for all the new code.
> scripts/r.tileset/r.tileset: heavy use of variable arrays
> scripts/v.in.gpsbabel/v.in.gpsbabel: not sure maybe mentioned in the
> bashism threads in the archives?
It seems that was because of `echo -e' [1] which seems to have
been subsequently removed. The `checkbashisms' script shows
nothing for `v.in.gpsbabel' now.
[1] nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gis.grass.devel/19389
It was noted that `echo' is generally ``unsafe''. Consider,
e. g., the following code:
echo "$a"
Contrary to the expectations, this code /doesn't/ print the
value of the `a' variable in all the possible cases. E. g.:
$ echo "$a"
$ printf "a: %s\n" "$a"
a: -n
$
(And it gets even worse if the `echo' command is extended to
support `-e' as well.)
Fortunately, the only case when this ``feature'' may be
effective is the `echo "$..." ...' case.
> ISTR that dash had an option to bulk test a script for bashisms.
> (see the archives)
?
> I don't know if it is worth the effort to worry about making those sh
> compatible. Even on Ubuntu where !/bin/sh isn't Bash, Bash is still
> there from the terminal prompt and if you request it in the shebang.
> And we've had no complaints from embedded users. v.in.gpsbabel and
> r.tileset should both be rewritten in another language anyway
> (python) so spending lots of effort on the current versions of them
> would be energy better spent somewhere else IMO.
Agreed.
> what's wrong with r.mapcalculator?
Nothing. It was my mistake.
[...]
> See also GRASS's tcltk gronsole capability* & QGIS's python shell
> menu item.
> [*] try typing 'ls' and then click [Run], or 'xeyes' and then [Run
> (bg)] in the lower panel of GIS.m's ouput window. I guess we could
> put some text like "console:" above the lower frame.
Unfortunately, it won't allow one to ``[Run]'' `for i in 1 2 3 ;
do something ; done' if there'd be no Shell.
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
