Re: [Libreoffice] OpenBSD patch #1

2010-11-01 Thread Thorsten Behrens
Michael Meeks wrote: As for the csh .Set file - hopefully we can bin that in a gnumake world, by having a single set of makefile variables generated instead of whacking them all in the environment via a given shell. Please - bin both .Set and .Set.sh then - since this

Re: [Libreoffice] OpenBSD patch #1

2010-10-28 Thread Tor Lillqvist
Should we change all the shell scripts that use bashisms on the upper level (from the build repo) to start with #!/usr/bin/env bash ? Is that then (finally) a good and reliable solution to the problem whether to use bash or not, and where bash is in case we do want to use it? Or is there some

Re: [Libreoffice] OpenBSD patch #1

2010-10-28 Thread Robert Nagy
env bash is needed since not every system has it in /bin (that basically includes everytihng except linux, mac and solaris?) Maintaining the csh style files are not needed and it just duplicates the work. If you want to build it, use a bourne-shell or go and download the binary packages. On

Re: [Libreoffice] OpenBSD patch #1

2010-10-28 Thread Michael Meeks
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 11:27 +0200, Robert Nagy wrote: env bash is needed since not every system has it in /bin (that basically includes everytihng except linux, mac and solaris?) Cool - so it seems we reached consensus; Lets go with env bash everywhere instead. As for the csh

Re: [Libreoffice] OpenBSD patch #1

2010-10-28 Thread Kevin Hunter
At 5:09am -0400 Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Michael Meeks wrote: Ultimately if people want to incrementally fix bash-isms as they creep in I see no reason why they should not commit fixes to make it use generic-shell; hopefully with the gnumake based build we'll have less shell lying around. An on going