From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LcSVd-00062R-Iy for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:45:45 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6CE26E027A; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D067E027A for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C37E9649ED; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:45:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA bashism check on portage Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:45:41 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.0 (Linux/2.6.28; KDE/4.2.0; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Timothy Redaelli References: <200902251710.09258.drizzt@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200902251710.09258.drizzt@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902251745.42989.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 2cf07196-6c7e-41c4-ab51-ecd55e9d4038 X-Archives-Hash: 555f40202662b10210b5376f11c938aa On Wednesday 25 February 2009 11:10:01 Timothy Redaelli wrote: > what do you think about checking for bashism on install_qa_check? > Obviously only for scripts with #!/bin/sh and #!/sbin/runscript as first > line. > > I think checkbashisms.pl [1] could be a good start point. > > [1] http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/devscripts/trunk/scripts/checkbashisms.pl i recall it being incorrect in some cases (it checked for what dash supports, not what POSIX supports), but that was a while ago, so maybe my experience is dated at this point. otherwise, integrating it sounds sane to me, and if we can push fixes back to debian, even better. a repoman check on files in files/ would be useful as well i'd think -mike