[PATCH] Make symlink-mesa.sh Bourne compatible

[Dan Nicholson]

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[1] 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.

--
Dan

1. http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#Limitations-of-Builtins