Re: [MLB] Fix for arg list too long (another attempt)

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb 19, 2001, Robert Boehne <address@hidden> wrote:

> +while test `$0 --fallback-echo "X$testring" >/dev/null 2>&1` == `echo 
> "X$testring" >/dev/null 2>&1` &&

$0 may not be executable.  Whenever you run a shell-script, you should
use something like `${CONFIG_SHELL-/bin/sh} shell-script-name'.

> +        expr "X$cmds" : ".*"
> +        if test $? -ne 0 || \
> +           test `expr "X$cmds" : ".*"` -gt $max_cmd_len ; then

How about something like:

           if len=`expr "X$cmds" : ".*" &&
              test $len -le $max_cmd_len; then
             :
           else
             ...


I have a slight recollection of `-eq', `-ne', `-gt', etc not being as
portable as `=' and `!=', however I can't find any information
supporting this notion.  Anyway, I'd recommend using `=' and `!=' as
much as possible.

> +          $echo "using incremental linking..."

There are existing linkers that use the term `incremental linking' with
a completely different meaning.  We should probably avoid reusing the
term; it would create confusion.  

> +            eval concat_cmds=\"\$concat_cmds~$reload_cmds $objlist 
> $output_objdir/$output-${klast}.$objext\"

Are you sure you don't want to protect objlist, output_objdir, output,
klast and objext from double-evaluation?

I still feel slightly worried about naming the temporary files
$output-#.$objext; we might clash with user's object files.  I've
never liked the `lt-' prefix we use in filenames when we want to
protect them from clashing with user files, but this seems like one of
the cases in which its use is justified.

Other than that, it seems good to me.  Feel free to check it in after
making the changes above.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  address@hidden, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        address@hidden, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me