Re: The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH]

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Roman Zippel wrote:
> 
> Sorry for the delay, but the git server were gone.
> 
> - the define command is inappropriate (it's primarily for rule 
>   definitions)

Looks fine. Especially considering the strange whitespace issues.

> - execute commands in the current dir as all other commands
> - .*.tmp (but not .*.null) files are also removed up by "make clean"
> - printf has other side effects, instead stop pretending we support 
>   something else than bash

However, this one I have problems with .The problem is, many people 
probably _do_ have bash, but it's in /bin/sh. That used to be a fairly 
common setup a long time ago. Maybe it's not any more, but the whole "fall 
back to sh" actually came from that.

The $BASH variable is only defined if you use bash as your *interactive* 
shell, ie if you started "make" from a bash shell.

Historically, people used to do:
 - /bin/sh was the "standard shell" (bash)
 - /bin/[t]csh is what clueless weenies use for interactive work.

(Yeah, I'm not a [t]csh fan ;)

And you did break that.

It's quite possible that all modern distributions will install /bin/bash 
as a link to /bin/sh, but I don't see the point of that particular change. 
We aren't even all that bash-centric any more. If you have a 
POSIX-compatible shell in /bin/sh, it really _should_ work. It just can't 
be something really broken.

> - proper quoting
> - proper indentation

One thing I'm wondering about is whether we could have a "does this warn" 
test. I guess you can do it with -Werror, but it might be nice to have 
some tests for "does the -Wxyzzy flag warn also for proper code"

		Linus