On 12 November 2012 13:52, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 13:11 -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> #!/bin/sh which is mandated to exist by POSIX
>
> Actually, unless there's been a change, POSIX doesn't mandate that the
> POSIX shell appear as /bin/sh.
Okay. Taking a deeper look here, I'm w
On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 13:11 -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:
> #!/bin/sh which is mandated to exist by POSIX
Actually, unless there's been a change, POSIX doesn't mandate that the
POSIX shell appear as /bin/sh.
Unfortunately, this means that systems are free to provide definitively
non-POSIX /bin/sh an
On 12 November 2012 13:11, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 12 November 2012 13:04, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> yes, when people tell you forcing asinine behavior is wrong, you label them
>> trolls. i guess that's how you "win" arguments.
>
> Claiming that systems without /bin/bash are "crap" shows a level
On 12 November 2012 13:04, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> yes, when people tell you forcing asinine behavior is wrong, you label them
> trolls. i guess that's how you "win" arguments.
Claiming that systems without /bin/bash are "crap" shows a level of
naivete that only someone new to the open source wo
On Monday 12 November 2012 06:03:37 Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> Running "sh -x test.sh" shows that the gcc command producing the error:
>
> + CCACHE_DISABLE=1 gcc -c test1.c -o reference_test1.o -O -O
> gcc: error trying to exec 'cc1': execvp: No such file or directory
>
> I don't understand what's wr
On Saturday 10 November 2012 05:08:40 Joel Rosdahl wrote:
> On 10 November 2012 06:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i see old style portable code in there that could easily be modernized to
> > recent POSIX
>
> Please don't strive to do that. Solaris's /bin/sh isn't POSIX.
autoconf searches well kn
On Sunday 11 November 2012 06:31:14 Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 11 November 2012 00:46, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 10 November 2012 00:41:52 Eitan Adler wrote:
> >> On 10 November 2012 00:41, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> > if the script is written in bash and is intended to be, then
> >> > /b
On 12 November 2012 13:00, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 12 November 2012 06:03, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>> Running "sh -x test.sh" shows that the gcc command producing the error:
>>
>> + CCACHE_DISABLE=1 gcc -c test1.c -o reference_test1.o -O -O
>> gcc: error trying to exec 'cc1': execvp: No such file or
On 12 November 2012 06:03, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> Running "sh -x test.sh" shows that the gcc command producing the error:
>
> + CCACHE_DISABLE=1 gcc -c test1.c -o reference_test1.o -O -O
> gcc: error trying to exec 'cc1': execvp: No such file or directory
>
> I don't understand what's wrong with t
On 11/11/12 11:31, Eitan Adler wrote:
Mike,
http://www.technollama.co.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/obvious-troll.jpg
Insulting respected members of the Linux community will get you nowhere.
I realise that some might call you the same, and BSD also, so you should
know better.
An
On 11 November 2012 00:46, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 10 November 2012 00:41:52 Eitan Adler wrote:
>> On 10 November 2012 00:41, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > if the script is written in bash and is intended to be, then
>> > /bin/bash is the correct answer.
>>
>> Absolutely false. /usr/local
On Saturday 10 November 2012 00:41:52 Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 10 November 2012 00:41, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > if the script is written in bash and is intended to be, then
> > /bin/bash is the correct answer.
>
> Absolutely false. /usr/local/bin or /opt/bin might be the correct location.
if you
On 10 November 2012 06:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i see old style portable code in there that could easily be modernized to
> recent POSIX
Please don't strive to do that. Solaris's /bin/sh isn't POSIX.
-- Joel
___
ccache mailing list
ccache@lists.samb
On Monday 05 November 2012 12:55:10 Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> The test script fails with shells other than bash. At least dash
> doesn't work.
could you post the exact errors you see ? i see old style portable code in
there that could easily be modernized to recent POSIX and plenty of quoting
issu
On 10 November 2012 00:41, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> ironic considering you're espousing a change to support crap systems that
> aren't relevant.
I won't comment on this.
> if the script is written in bash and is intended to be, then
> /bin/bash is the correct answer.
Absolutely false. /usr/local
On Tuesday 06 November 2012 11:53:12 Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 6 November 2012 04:54, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> > While it is true that "/usr/bin/env bash" is more portable than
> > "/bin/bash", I also don't like it as much.
> >
> > If I run a "#!/bin/bash" script without bash installed I get:
> > /
On 5 November 2012 18:55, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> The test script fails with shells other than bash. At least dash
> doesn't work.
test.sh is intended to work even on Solaris's /bin/sh, which is even more
restricted than dash. Current test.sh on master and maint works well with
dash for me. Plea
On 06/11/12 16:53, Eitan Adler wrote:
Perhaps you should get a better version of env?
Perhaps I should! I'm running Ubuntu 12.10, so I'm surprised about that.
But even if I did there would be many others with the same issue.
The followup to this discussion indicates that /bin/sh seems to be
On 6 November 2012 04:54, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
>
> While it is true that "/usr/bin/env bash" is more portable than "/bin/bash",
> I also don't like it as much.
>
> If I run a "#!/bin/bash" script without bash installed I get:
>
> /bin/bash: bad interpreter: No such file or directory
>
> If I try
On 06/11/12 10:05, g@free.fr wrote:
On my debian stable machine (x86 32 bits), I set sh as a symlink to dash and
changed my script to emit SHELL='/bin/dash'
test is ok with 3.1.8 (ccache is statically linked to glibc in my
configuration).
I looked with checkbashims on test.sh git version a
- Mail original -
> De: "Andrew Stubbs"
> À: "g esp"
> Cc: ccache@lists.samba.org
> Envoyé: Mardi 6 Novembre 2012 10:55:23
> Objet: Re: [ccache] [PATCH] Use bash for test.sh.
>
> On 05/11/12 22:35, g@free.fr wrote:
> > ccache-3.1.8 &
On 05/11/12 22:35, g@free.fr wrote:
ccache-3.1.8 'make check' work with dash, no?
There's no problem with configure or make, only with test.sh.
Andrew
___
ccache mailing list
ccache@lists.samba.org
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/ccache
On 05/11/12 17:58, Eitan Adler wrote:
-#!/bin/sh
+#!/bin/bash
This line is buggy:
please http://blog.eitanadler.com/2012/10/binbash-considered-harmful.html
for why.
I ideally the non-portable bashims get fixed but if not the shebang
line must be "/usr/bin/env bash" not /bin/bash.
While it i
- Mail original -
> De: "Andrew Stubbs"
> À: ccache@lists.samba.org
> Envoyé: Lundi 5 Novembre 2012 18:55:10
> Objet: [ccache] [PATCH] Use bash for test.sh.
>
> The test script fails with shells other than bash. At least dash
> doesn't work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Stubbs
> ---
>
On 5 November 2012 12:55, Andrew Stubbs wrote:
> The test script fails with shells other than bash. At least dash
> doesn't work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Stubbs
> ---
> test.sh |2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/test.sh b/test.sh
> index 4c78617..a334f6
25 matches
Mail list logo
