[Bug localedata/15831] Bad $expect passed from tst-fmon.sh to tst-fmon

["carlos at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15831

--- Comment #5 from Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com> ---
(In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #4)
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, carlos at redhat dot com wrote:
> 
> > There are patches outstanding to glibc to allow it to build with a POSIX shell
> > and not require bash-specific extensions.
> > 
> > I suggest looking through back months in libc-alpha, finding the patches that
> > were posted and adding them to the `Pending Reviews' list so we don't loose
> > track of them and get around to reviewing them:
> > http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Pending%20Reviews
> > 
> > Note, you need to be in EditorGroup to edit the wiki:
> > http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/EditorGroup
> > 
> > This would go a long way to fixing this problem.
> > 
> > At present we only support /bin/bash, thus closing as RESOLVED/INVALID.
> 
> I don't believe your answer justifies closing this bug, or is in any way 
> relevant to this bug.  Such patches as there are are about making 
> installed bash scripts such as ldd into installed POSIX shell scripts. 
> They are not about supporting building or testing glibc without bash 
> available for scripts that require bash.  And they are not about cases 
> where scripts use /bin/sh but in fact require non-POSIX shell features - 
> such cases are all bugs, for which two fixes are possible in each case 
> (either explicitly require bash for the script, or make it work with the 
> POSIX shell).

If that's the case then I've misremembered the patches that have been posted.

> This script (tst-fmon.sh) is an sh script.  So, if it doesn't work with a 
> POSIX shell, that's a bug, not an enhancement request, and not invalid, 
> and should be fixed in one of those two ways.

Good point.

> Now, the analysis in this bug does not appear to disclose whether in fact 
> the script is doing anything non-POSIX, or whether the problem comes from 
> a dash bug where dash fails to follow POSIX requirements - if the latter, 
> the bug would indeed be invalid.  But such an analysis of whether the 
> differences between bash and dash reflect a dash bug or the script 
> requiring something beyond POSIX is needed before the bug can be 
> considered invalid.

I have completed a review of tst-fmon.sh and I see nothing that is non-POSIX in
the shell. I've looked for common bash-isms (function, case, numeric loops,
expand sequences, extended glob, select, ==) and fond none. I also ran Debian's
checkbashisms perl script and it found no bash-isms in the script.

Therefore I'm leaving it closed as resolved/invalid and leaving it up to the
submitter to work out the dash bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.