belleyb added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/lit.cfg.py:52-57
+if platform.system() in ['Windows']:
+ config.substitutions.append(('dos2unix', 'sed -b "s/\r$//"'))
+ config.substitutions.append(('unix2dos', 'sed -b "s/\r*$/\r/"'))
+else:
+ config.substitutions.append(('dos2unix', "sed $'s/\r$//'"))
+ config.substitutions.append(('unix2dos', "sed $'s/\r*$/\r/'"))
----------------
caoz wrote:
> zturner wrote:
> > Since the user has `sed` already, why wouldn't they have the actual tool
> > `dos2unix` and `unix2dos`?
> Thanks Zachary. dos2unix and unix2dos aren't installed by default on
> Linux/Mac. However, if the user can be assumed to have them, I can remove
> these substitutions.
@zturner According to https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#software, we
shouldn't be relying on `dos2unix` nor `unix2dos` to be present on a build
machine.
Note that the `$'string'` syntax (ANSI-C quotes) is a `bash` extension.
According to the page mentioned above, the LLVM builds should only be relying
on having a Bourne shell (`sh`). But, are there still any *nix system out there
where `/bin/sh` isn't a link for `\bin\bash` ? I.e. Is relying on `bash+sed`
fine here ?
A fully portable solution would be to write python scripts for `dos2unix.py`
and `unix2dos.py`. That way, one would not be relying on build tools that LLVM
isn't already using.
Any advice on how to proceed ?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41081
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
