[PATCH] Make symlink-mesa.sh Bourne compatible
dbn.lists at gmail.com
Sat Mar 8 13:06:39 PST 2008
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger
<joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2008 at 10:40:18AM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > 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.
> Even Solaris has it and that has the most broken and ancient userland of
> any Unix I am aware of. Given that autoconf explicitly talks about
> printf in "Limitations of Shell Builtins", it can be assumed to be
> ubiquious. Note that printf is a bit different to use than echo, which
> is why it isn't used by many.
The same limitations section you quote says:
"New applications which are not aiming at portability should use
`printf' instead of `echo'."
Not exactly a ringing endorsement for portability. You still haven't
said what's wrong with using the portable autoconf way.
More information about the xorg