On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Daenyth Blank <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 14:59, Dan McGee <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Cedric Staniewski <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The complete file path of a temporary symlink is really useless >>> information. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Cedric Staniewski <[email protected]> >>> --- >> Not really sure what the right answer is, but what is the reasoning >> not to use something like `basename` here? Obviously this is a bit >> faster but there is a utility for this that must have some practical >> purpose. >> > > I seem to recall reading at some point that basename is not very > portable. I could be mistaken though...
I thought it was just with the C library function and not the shell wrapper. I made commit dea9b3bc0f6ba49aec8452958f5373fbb20e7df2 some 2.5 years ago. Of course, all our custom basename function does is exactly what the bash replacement above does, so we can probably let it fly. -Dan
