Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Jim,
>
> * Jim Meyering wrote on Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 08:54:50AM CEST:
>> --- bootstrap 7 Sep 2006 21:00:58 -0000 1.8
>> +++ bootstrap 8 Sep 2006 06:48:43 -0000
>> @@ -212,6 +212,29 @@
>> fi;;
>> esac
>>
>> +cp_mark_as_generated()
>> +{
>> + local src=$1
>> + local dst=$2
>> + local c1 c2
>
> Just FYI: this bootstrap script will not work any more with some shells
> that are still in practical use. The Tru64 /bin/sh for example does not
> understand `local', unlike its /usr/bin/posix/sh.
> (I have not tested whether it worked with /bin/sh before; but from a
> glance, I don't see why it should not.)
Hi Ralf,
Thanks for the quick review and the heads up.
However, do you really think we should obfuscate (even a little) to
cater to such old systems when it comes to _development_ tools?
After all, we're talking about checking out from cvs and running
"./bootstrap", with all of the other developer tools thus required.
Why not require a working /bin/sh as well, or at least the knowledge to
run "bash ./bootstrap ...".
People with a limited build environment can always build from a
released tarball.
