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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-34616-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1Lccbw-0006bc-R7
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:32:56 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BC084E0192;
	Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:32:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C218E0192
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:32:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3355F6517B;
	Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:32:55 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Organization: wh0rd.org
To: Timothy Redaelli <drizzt@gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA bashism check on portage
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 04:32:52 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.11.0 (Linux/2.6.28; KDE/4.2.0; x86_64; ; )
Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <200902251710.09258.drizzt@gentoo.org> <200902251745.42989.vapier@gentoo.org> <200902261027.51235.drizzt@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <200902261027.51235.drizzt@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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: <200902260432.54475.vapier@gentoo.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 26f340ab-9084-4e9d-aa47-546e66eec084
X-Archives-Hash: 06788cb9b32f99210be0ff1fe1e79ff4

On Thursday 26 February 2009 04:27:44 Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 February 2009 23:45:41 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > 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.
>
> It does not fail, the problem is that some construct works only on some
> shells or systems (for example type and kill -HUP warnings).
>
> Maybe we should add a getopt flag (-q for example) to mask that types of
> warnings, or maybe we should (for Gentoo/Alt) adapt files to be (almost)
> POSIX compliant (so command -v instead of type, kill -s HUP instead of
> kill -HUP, and go on)

i'm totally not following.  we were talking about POSIX shell syntax, but now 
you're talking about utilities as well ?
-mike