-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 According to Paolo Bonzini on 11/10/2008 4:07 AM: >>>> Just for safety, shouldn't the test use '%s\n' rather than bare %s (in >>>> other >>>> words, make our test match our usage pattern)? >>> _AS_ECHO_PREPARE does the same... >> Here's a chance to fix both at once. :-) > > To be more precise, Autoconf also needs an "echo -n" emulation, so it > does use "printf %s" too. I just copied the assumption that if one > works, the other does too.
After more thought, I'm okay with that assumption. printf(1) is a new enough invention that all known implementations, even non-builtins, manage \n format sequence correctly. > 1) portability. I looked again at Sven Mascheck's pages, and you're > probably thinking of http://www.in-ulm.de/~mascheck/various/uuoc/ where > he says: > > Here documents [used with cat] force `as-is' output, if there are > character sequences which are special to echo(1), and if printf(1) is > not available". Equally as expensive as when printf exists but not as a builtin. Can't implement AS_ECHO_N, but that is not a problem for libtool's usage. So I like the idea of using cat as the fallback, rather than 'printf of another shell'. - -- Don't work too hard, make some time for fun as well! Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin) Comment: Public key at home.comcast.net/~ericblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkkYPSQACgkQ84KuGfSFAYChhQCgh8qvESxZuPyucESvvk1HFbLj AIYAoM1+jhGhmKXE5fUZosMAfJNa6lzg =0zkc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
