From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3627 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2008 11:50:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 3619 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jul 2008 11:50:37 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:50:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m6TBo96F027195 for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:50:09 -0400 Received: from pobox.fab.redhat.com (pobox.fab.redhat.com [10.33.63.12]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6TBo7iD023690; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:50:08 -0400 Received: from [10.32.4.34] (vpn-4-34.str.redhat.com [10.32.4.34]) by pobox.fab.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m6TBo63i023782; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:50:06 -0400 Message-ID: <488F03EF.60304@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:50:00 -0000 From: Nick Clifton User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, brolley@redhat.com, bje@gnu.org, cgen@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFA: Fix the shell used to execute mloop.in References: <20080724101338.GA21676@redhat.com> <48885757.7030402@redhat.com> <20080724144215.GB3811@redhat.com> <48889C4C.2050605@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cgen-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cgen-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00007.txt.bz2 Hi Frank, >> Oh no, the script is compatible with /bin/sh. It is just that (if I >> remember correctly) on some earlier versions of Solaris /bin/sh is >> broken and you need to use /bin/zsh instead. I was mistaken - I should have said /bin/ksh not /bin/zsh. > It would be helpful if you could find some information on this; if > it's only a rumour, or if it only applies to a fifteen-year-old > operating system, maybe it's not worth worrying about it. There are some limitations of various shells mentioned here: http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/autoconf/Limitations-of-Builtins.html Essentially though I think that the correct thing to do is to allow the user the choice of which shell they are going to use to execute scripts, precisely because of the possibility of bugs in the "standard" shell they might exist on their host machine. Cheers Nick