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 1LccXI-0005qC-1F for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:28:08 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A1950E0229; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80AEDE0229 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:27:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F496515F; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:27:52 +0000 (UTC) From: Timothy Redaelli Organization: Gentoo Foundation To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA bashism check on portage Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:27:44 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Mike Frysinger References: <200902251710.09258.drizzt@gentoo.org> <200902251745.42989.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200902251745.42989.vapier@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: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart7976776.gX3dzVxrlS"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200902261027.51235.drizzt@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 38b1e16e-09f0-41a4-a120-5bb3222bcae6 X-Archives-Hash: 2f3eaebea9c279b1dc4b1b40b77d37a7 --nextPart7976776.gX3dzVxrlS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline 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 she= lls=20 or systems (for example type and kill -HUP warnings). Maybe we should add a getopt flag (-q for example) to mask that types of=20 warnings, or maybe we should (for Gentoo/Alt) adapt files to be (almost)=20 POSIX compliant (so command -v instead of type, kill -s HUP instead of=20 kill -HUP, and go on) > a repoman check on files in files/ would be useful as well i'd think Yes, as supplementary check =2D-=20 Timothy `Drizzt` Redaelli =46reeSBIE Developer, Gentoo Developer, GUFI Staff There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson --nextPart7976776.gX3dzVxrlS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkmmYJcACgkQ9LNSOuuNMUUleACfbg9PvNTQpBc6LCG730JI+Iy1 73kAnRVOvm2Ph5bIA+e51gsbxdE2zzt6 =GXRW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart7976776.gX3dzVxrlS--