On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 03:05:45PM +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: > Simon Kuhnle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Oh, nice, thank you :-) > > No problem. Sometimes, you should just ask upstream instead of adding > more patches, especially if it's an alpha. :) >
I already opened a ticket for this once: http://trac.gajim.org/ticket/3463 Which reminds me of the problem: "sys.executable returns /usr/local/bin/gajim here, even if I run it from svn (so by running launsh.sh)" At least asterix said so, is this still true? If so, then I guess you need to revert that patch again :-( > > The only other patch patches the gajim starter shellscript to use > > /bin/sh and not /bin/bash, so I don't need bash as a dependency. > > > > -#!/bin/bash > > +#!/bin/sh > > Ugh, that's an evil one, indeed. I just always python gajim.py > (well, I don't, but my startscript does, thus I never noticed. > > > -exec -a gajim ${PYTHON_EXEC} -OO gajim.py $@ > > +exec ${PYTHON_EXEC} -OO gajim.py $@ > > That -a is used so the process is displayed as being Gajim. Do you know of a > portable way for that? Otherwise I'd need to somehow check if it's bash > and only then do that. Personally I can't think of a way to do that... Perhaps somebody else on this list does? > > > as the shell doesn't have the -a flag. > > Yes, it's a bash extension. > > > No big deal, as -a only changes the name of the process AFAIK. > > Exactly. That makes it possible to use pkill gajim :). > I see. Well it's not that important for me. Using ps for this task isn't that hard, too. ;-) > -- > Jonathan -- simon
