[PATCH] Make symlink-mesa.sh Bourne compatible

[Dan Nicholson]

On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
<joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2008 at 08:56:55AM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>  > @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ error() {
>  >  run_module() {
>  >      # $1 module
>  >      # $2 explanation
>  > -    echo -n $EXPLANATION for $1 module ...\
>  > +    echo $ECHO_N "$EXPLANATION for $1 module ... $ECHO_C"
>
>  printf "%s for %s module ..." "$EXPLANATION" "$1"
>
>  or something like that is better.

But then you require printf. It should be there on any sane system,
but why bother? The above is exactly what the configure script does
hundreds of times. I would imagine the autoconf people have a pretty
decent grasp on this issue.

>  > @@ -337,8 +338,19 @@ check_args() {
>  >      B=`basename "$relpath"`
>  >      abspath="`cd \"$D\" 2>/dev/null && pwd || echo \"$D\"`/$B"
>  >
>  > -    SRC_DIR=`( cd $1 ; pwd )`
>  > -    DST_DIR=`(cd $2 ; pwd )`
>  > +    SRC_DIR=`cd $1 ; pwd`
>  > +    DST_DIR=`cd $2 ; pwd`
>
>  I think it is better to use && here, but that is cosmetical.

Good point, but that's a separate issue. I just removed the extraneous
subshell when you're already in a subshell.

--
Dan