On 2009-Aug-02 12:24:26 -0700, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 1) It uses 'set -e' to exit the spkg-install if any error occurs. > >+1 we should do that for all spkg-install's
Agreed (and there are other shell-scripts that probably should also
have 'set -e'). But this is a very intrusive change since it touches
at least one file in virtually every spkg.
It's also non-trivial: The spkg-install files are full of constructs
like:
sage_fortran -c -fPIC *.f
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
echo "Error compiling blas."
exit 1
fi
In order to add 'set -e', this needs to be changed to directly test the
exit code rather than using $? - otherwise the script will immediately
exit when the command fails. The revised code should look like:
if ! sage_fortran -c -fPIC *.f; then
echo "Error compiling blas."
exit 1
fi
In addition to the above, there is a non-trivial amount of shell code
embedded in python scripts that also needs improved error checking.
Assuming that the change should be implemented, what approach should
be used:
1) Big bang: Someone goes through all the skpg files and fixes them
in one go with no other changes as part of a major release.
2) If you touch any part of an spkg, you must add 'set -e' and fixup
any subsequent fallout in all scripts in that spkg.
3) If you touch a script, you must fixup that script.
4) Fix it if you feel like it.
--
Peter Jeremy
pgpDJ0B2CDgXH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
