Jan Setje-Eilers wrote:
> >      35
> >      36 BOOT_ARCHIVE=platform/i86pc/boot_archive
> >      37 BOOT_ARCHIVE_64=platform/i86pc/amd64/boot_archive
> >      38
> >      39 export PATH=$PATH:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin
> >
> > AFAIK this is completely wrong. If $PATH gets added then it should be
> > after all the primary stuff, otherwise adding something "unexpected"
> > which supersets normal tools in /usr/bin/ may cause havoc...
> 
>  It's a misguided attempt to work around bfu being more than a bit of
> a mess in that respect. This has been changed to explicitly check for
> and pick up tmp/bfubin:
> 
> if [ "`echo $PATH | cut -f 1 -d :`" = /tmp/bfubin ] && \
>     [ -O /tmp/bfubin ] ; then
>         export PATH=/tmp/bfubin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin

What is the expected content of $PATH if this contidion is "true" ?
AFAIK the same could be expressed via...
-- snip --
if [[ "${PATH}" = ~(El)/tmp/bfubin.* && -O "/tmp/bfubin" ]] ; then
-- snip --
(the ~(E) means "use egrep pattern instead of shell pattern" and the 'l'
is a modier which says "left anchor")

> else
>         export PATH=/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin
> fi
> 
>  That change will go back with the new-boot sparc wad.

Will you keep the script or are you going to replace it with an all-new
script ?

----

Bye,
Roland

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)

Reply via email to