Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> OK to apply?
Not this bit:
> @@ -2611,14 +2596,8 @@ func_to_host_path ()
> # *an error message* to stdout. So we must check for both
> # error code of zero AND non-empty stdout, which explains
> # the odd construction:
> - func_to_host_path_tmp1=`winepath -w "$1" 2>/dev/null`
> - if test "$?" -eq 0 && test -n "${func_to_host_path_tmp1}"; then
> - func_to_host_path_result=`$ECHO "$func_to_host_path_tmp1" |\
> - $SED -e "$lt_sed_naive_backslashify"`
> - else
> - # Allow warning below.
> - func_to_host_path_result=""
> - fi
> + func_to_host_path_result=`( winepath -w "$1" ) 2>/dev/null |
> + $SED -e "$lt_sed_naive_backslashify"`
> ;;
> esac
> if test -z "$func_to_host_path_result" ; then
Roumen and I went round and round on that, The full comment block says:
# Unfortunately, winepath does not exit with a non-zero
# error code, so we are forced to check the contents of
# stdout. On the other hand, if the command is not
# found, the shell will set an exit code of 127 and print
# *an error message* to stdout. So we must check for both
# error code of zero AND non-empty stdout, which explains
# the odd construction:
Your change eliminates ALL of that special handling, dealing with
winepath's quirks.
--
Chuck
