The same script will fail on Ububtu as well - I just checked they don't
exist there.
if vax; then
will fail whether vax exists with one or with vax not present.
Whether -e is set is not important. Other than the additional errors
the script will continue to run.
Casper
I am sponsoring this case for Rick Weisner.
Requested release binding: Patch
Modified man pages are in the case's materials directory and diffs
are at the end of this proposal.
Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.70 03/30/10 SMI
This information is Copyright (c) 2010, Oracle and/or its
On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 01:44:47PM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 08/06/2010 13:14, Steve McKinty wrote:
If I wrote a portable configure script which contained something
like:
if [ vax ]; then
do vaxy setup
else if [ u3b ]; then
do ATT setup
else if [ sun ]; then
do Solaris setup
On 8/06/10 07:59 PM, Steve McKinty wrote:
Why are these not relevant? In my experience they are mostly
used in scripts and Makefiles, to ensure that the right code path
is taken. Won't removing them break older configure-style scripts,
i.e. ones that test things like if [ ! vax ] etc.?
Is the
On 8/06/10 10:33 PM, James Carlson wrote:
Steve McKinty wrote:
If I wrote a portable configure script which contained something
like:
if [ vax ]; then
do vaxy setup
Obviously, that should be if vax; then rather than with the test
brackets, but otherwise I think Steve McKinty has a very
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 11:59 +0200, Steve McKinty wrote:
Why are these not relevant? In my experience they are mostly
used in scripts and Makefiles, to ensure that the right code path
is taken. Won't removing them break older configure-style scripts,
i.e. ones that test things like if [ ! vax ]
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 17:04 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 08/06/2010 07:11, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Darren,
On 06/07/10 06:06 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
I agree with Bart I don't approve of the removal of this command.
Cleaning up SFW is fine but don't throw out useful good
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
And if the case owners decline to withdraw?
We can suggest, but as I understand it, the only action we have
available to us formally as part of a fast track (besides +1'ing or
remaining silent) is to derail.
The tool may be useful, but so are a great many others.
Bart Smaalders wrote:
On 06/07/10 08:30, James Carlson wrote:
Sebastien Roy wrote:
I'm submitting this fast-track for Cathy Zhou, timing out on
06/14/2010.
The design document referenced below is contained in the materials
directory.
Nicely done!
Just one question: does gethrtime always
On 06/08/10 09:57, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Garrett and Darren,
On 06/08/10 09:35 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 17:04 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 08/06/2010 07:11, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Darren,
On 06/07/10 06:06 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
I agree with Bart I
Hi Garrett and Darren,
On 06/08/10 09:35 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 17:04 +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On 08/06/2010 07:11, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Darren,
On 06/07/10 06:06 AM, Darren J Moffat wrote:
I agree with Bart I don't approve of the removal of this
Hi Gary, Darren, Garrett, Bart and Lukas,
How about setting up an offline meeting to discuss the case?
As there is no PSARC meeting tomorrow, I guess we can use 10:00 AM pacific
time slot.
Does it work for you?
Thanks,
-Suha
On 06/08/10 10:24 AM, Gary Winiger wrote:
On 06/08/10 09:57,
Hi Suha all,
I apologize but I am on vacation tomorrow (till end of this week). A
call would work for me sometime the next week.
I understand the concerns about some bigger plans.
If I have time I will try to provide some more comments later today (err
night my time). However, the main
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 10:38 -0700, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Gary, Darren, Garrett, Bart and Lukas,
How about setting up an offline meeting to discuss the case?
As there is no PSARC meeting tomorrow, I guess we can use 10:00 AM pacific
time slot.
Does it work for you?
I don't need to be
On 06/08/10 10:38, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi Gary, Darren, Garrett, Bart and Lukas,
How about setting up an offline meeting to discuss the case?
As there is no PSARC meeting tomorrow, I guess we can use 10:00 AM pacific
time slot.
What's to discuss? The project team needs to explain
Hi James,
On 06/08/10 10:35 AM, James Carlson wrote:
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
And if the case owners decline to withdraw?
We can suggest, but as I understand it, the only action we have
available to us formally as part of a fast track (besides +1'ing or
remaining silent) is to derail.
The tool
Hi Asa and Seb,
Please ignore my earlier request. We can discuss this case in the regular
PSARC meeting next week, if required, after Lukas provides details about future
plans for pwgen/SFW) and no need to have a special meeting.
Thanks,
-Suha
On 06/08/10 10:48 AM, Lukas Rovensky wrote:
Hi
On 06/ 8/10 01:50 PM, Suhasini Peddada wrote:
Hi James,
On 06/08/10 10:35 AM, James Carlson wrote:
I'm not opposed to the project, but I do think it'd be much simpler if
we had a higher-level (say, architectural) review of the delivery
mechanisms themselves.
In reviewing the Brownian motion
This case is requesting a Minor release binding and will only deliver to
OpenSolaris (Nevada). It has a timeout of 06/16/2010.
Brian
On 06/ 8/10 04:42 PM, Brian Cameron wrote:
Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.70 03/30/10 SMI
This information is Copyright (c) 2010, Oracle and/or its
Brian Cameron wrote:
Imported Interfaces
Interface StabilityComments
---
SUNWsqlite3Contracted Project sqlite3 db
Private
Brian,
Should the local.sqlite be Project Private instead of Volatile?
Also the packages should be part of the exported interface
table as they show up in various places like Package Manager
and pkg search. Please insure that the new IPS packages
are included in the table.
Should Thunderbird
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 13:03 -0700, Scott Rotondo
wrote:
Several people have pointed out that the harm from
removing these
commands isn't that great because
(a) recent scripts tend not to use this mechanism
to figure out the type
of platform, and
(b) older scripts will still
So, I read all the e-mails on this -- thanks for interesting discussion.
Here are a few more comments from me:
1) I got an approval from SFW c-team to move pwgen from SFW to /contrib
*prior* submitting this PSARC case. So, I will go back again to the
c-team for and advice how to proceed /
23 matches
Mail list logo
