[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16 |
Date: |
Tue, 7 Jan 2014 10:53:06 -0800 |
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 10:31 AM, <address@hidden> wrote:
> I suspect that the Solaris sh doesn't understand $(...), but
> rather only `...`
Hi Arnold,
Yes, that is the problem, but the sourced init.sh code works around it...
usually. By sourcing the generated shell code rather than invoking
$SHELL, we benefit from the environment set up by init.sh.
Dago, also, using $(...) is not a bashism, and imho, nothing to be
avoided. It has been supported by all POSIX-confirming shells for
many years. `...` is the syntax that should be avoided. *It* causes
needless obfuscation because you cannot nest one `...` expression inside
another like you can with $(...), and worse, use of `...` has resulted
in at least one hard-to-diagnose bug in coreutils tests, where a missing
backtick led to a multi-line if-else block being silently snarfed by
the parser, as it looked for a matching backtick.
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Dagobert Michelsen, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Jim Meyering, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, arnold, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16,
Jim Meyering <=
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Paul Eggert, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Jim Meyering, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Paul Eggert, 2014/01/07
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Paul Eggert, 2014/01/08
- bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Dagobert Michelsen, 2014/01/08
bug#16380: Failing tests on Solaris in 2.16, Dagobert Michelsen, 2014/01/08