Re: init.sh changes pushed

* Eric Blake wrote on Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 02:22:06PM CET: > Next question - how to learn the running script. This has been discussed by Stefano Lattarini on automake-patches a little while ago, > Good: bash, dash, Sol

Re: init.sh changes pushed

According to Jim Meyering on 2/16/2010 6:07 AM: >>> + *) feb_file_=$(echo $feb_file_ | sed "s,^$feb_dir_/,,;"'s/\.exe$//') >> >> How do we go about fixing this? Should init.sh be given some smarts (like >> autoconf-generated files) to re-exec the calling script using a saner >> shell? > > I

Re: init.sh changes pushed

Eric Blake wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 2/15/2010 11:36 PM: >> I've pushed the init.sh changes we discussed yesterday. > > I just realized something - for coreutils, you guarantee that init.sh will > be called by a relatively-compliant shell. But gnulib makes no special > effort to avoid

Re: init.sh changes pushed

According to Jim Meyering on 2/15/2010 11:36 PM: > I've pushed the init.sh changes we discussed yesterday. I just realized something - for coreutils, you guarantee that init.sh will be called by a relatively-compliant shell. But gnulib makes no special effort to avoid /bin/sh, which means init.sh

init.sh changes pushed

I've pushed the init.sh changes we discussed yesterday. I have not yet addressed the multiple-dir-add-to-PATH being in the reverse order, but so far, there are is no user that calls path_prepend_ with two or more names. >From 9d2dcbfcfd0b8be3d89332aafbb731935f029915 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: