On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 02:53:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:46:03AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The pg_upgrade makefile does in fact use $(SHELL), so it will default to
> >> whatever shell configure used.
>
> > It will not, because we don't set
Michael Paquier writes:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 02:53:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> A quick trawl of the buildfarm logs says most of our animals compute
>> SHELL = /bin/sh anyway, and so would be unaffected. There's a sizable
>> population that find /bin/bash though, and one active critter
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 02:53:51PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oh! Hm, I wonder whether we shouldn't do that, ie add SHELL = @SHELL@
> to Makefile.global.in.
That sounds like a good idea to me.
> A quick trawl of the buildfarm logs says most of our animals compute
> SHELL = /bin/sh anyway, and so
Noah Misch writes:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:46:03AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The pg_upgrade makefile does in fact use $(SHELL), so it will default to
>> whatever shell configure used.
> It will not, because we don't set $(SHELL) anywhere. $(SHELL) is not @SHELL@.
> In our makefiles,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 10:46:03AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch writes:
> > I'd say the right way to fix this is the one specified in
> > https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_node/The-Make-Macro-SHELL.html,
> > in particular:
>
> > Using @SHELL@ means that
Noah Misch writes:
> I'd say the right way to fix this is the one specified in
> https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf-2.69/html_node/The-Make-Macro-SHELL.html,
> in particular:
> Using @SHELL@ means that your makefile will benefit from the same improved
> shell, such as bash
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:09:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Victor Wagner writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Please send a patch. Most of us do not have access to old shells
>
> > Here it goes. Previous letter was written before fixed tests were
> > completed, because this old machine is slow.
>
"Tels" writes:
> Looking at your new patch, I notice you used "" for quoting, not ''. (Not
> sure which variant Tom used when pushing a patch).
> I'm not a shell expert, but I think '' are safer, as "" still has some
> interpolation from the shell (at least on the systems I use regulary):
We
Moin,
On Sat, July 21, 2018 12:47 pm, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
>> "Tels" writes:
>>> + *) if [ `find ${PGDATA} -type f ! -perm 640 | wc -l` -ne 0 ]; then
>>
>>> Shouldn't ${PGDATA} in the above as argument to find be quoted,
>>> otherwise
>>> the shell would
ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari =?utf-8?Q?Manns=C3=A5ker?=) writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> Hmm. Yeah, probably. I don't think this script is meant to be run with
>> arbitrary values of PGDATA, but most of the other uses are quoted, so
>> for consistency's sake this should be too.
> Attached
Tom Lane writes:
> "Tels" writes:
>> +*) if [ `find ${PGDATA} -type f ! -perm 640 | wc -l` -ne 0 ]; then
>
>> Shouldn't ${PGDATA} in the above as argument to find be quoted, otherwise
>> the shell would get confused if it contains spaces or other special
>> characters?
>
> Hmm. Yeah,
"Tels" writes:
> + *) if [ `find ${PGDATA} -type f ! -perm 640 | wc -l` -ne 0 ]; then
> Shouldn't ${PGDATA} in the above as argument to find be quoted, otherwise
> the shell would get confused if it contains spaces or other special
> characters?
Hmm. Yeah, probably. I don't think
Moin,
On Fri, July 20, 2018 10:55 am, Victor Wagner wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:25:47 -0400
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Victor Wagner writes:
>> > I've discovered that in the branch REL_11_STABLE there is shell
>> > script src/bin/pg_upgrade/test.sh which doesn't work under Solaris
>> > 10. (it
Victor Wagner writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Please send a patch. Most of us do not have access to old shells
> Here it goes. Previous letter was written before fixed tests were
> completed, because this old machine is slow.
Thanks. Will check on my own dinosaurs, and push if I don't find
a
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 10:25:47 -0400
Tom Lane wrote:
> Victor Wagner writes:
> > I've discovered that in the branch REL_11_STABLE there is shell
> > script src/bin/pg_upgrade/test.sh which doesn't work under Solaris
> > 10. (it uses $(command) syntax with is not compatible with original
> >
Victor Wagner writes:
> I've discovered that in the branch REL_11_STABLE there is shell script
> src/bin/pg_upgrade/test.sh which doesn't work under Solaris 10.
> (it uses $(command) syntax with is not compatible with original
> Solaris /bin/sh)
OK ...
> It is quite easy to replace $() syntax
Collegues,
I've discovered that in the branch REL_11_STABLE there is shell script
src/bin/pg_upgrade/test.sh which doesn't work under Solaris 10.
(it uses $(command) syntax with is not compatible with original
Solaris /bin/sh)
I was quite surprised that this problem goes unnoticed on big
17 matches
Mail list logo
