On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:10:52PM -0400, Earnie wrote:
> I'm not eggert but IMO there is always the ability to install a
> POSIX compliant shell in the local environment so we just force the
> requirement to have one for autotools. The quoted document was
> written when open source environments
On 08/14/18 13:53, John Ericson wrote:
I think I need you to resolve these problems as you see fit.
Here's a tentative resolution of those issues.
>From f8b614809cfabd6f98cfc02b7cf90bf2f68d30cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To:
References:
<7aa195016503d03125cdcbaf0a53788322
Hi Ben,
That wouldn't be much of a testsuite, now, would it? ;-)
Ben
Well, it's randomized property testing akin to [QuickCheck]. The point
wouldn't be to test the accepted output, but just to ensure the input
indeed is accepted. The manual tests are the only way to test the
output, unless
On 8/14/2018 5:28 AM, Ben Elliston wrote:
Hi John
The Autoconf shell portability guide [1] says this about ${var:-value}
substitutions (which, I should point out, *are* in the POSIX shell):
${var:-value}
Old BSD shells, including the Ultrix sh, don't accept the colon
for any she
Hi John
The Autoconf shell portability guide [1] says this about ${var:-value}
substitutions (which, I should point out, *are* in the POSIX shell):
${var:-value}
Old BSD shells, including the Ultrix sh, don't accept the colon
for any shell substitution, and complain and die. Similarly f
