From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Verych <olecom@flower.upol.cz>
Subject: Re: The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH]
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 23:53:09 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702082335150.14457@scrub.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081414150.8424@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Hi,
On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 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.
I don't quite understand, the Makefile doesn't care anymore about /bin/sh
with this patch, the Makefile checks only for $BASH and /bin/bash
(equivalent to adding "#! /bin/bash" to scripts) and if the latter fails
it's possible some of our scripts will fail. We could make sure that all
our scripts are POSIX clean, but is it really worth the effort? It would
make casual kbuild hacking only even more difficult, as one has to check
it works with the various shells.
> > - 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"
Adding something like try-compile should be possible, but we should be
careful with this, the more checks we add the more work is done at every
make invocation.
bye, Roman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-08 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-08 21:48 The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH] Roman Zippel
2007-02-08 22:05 ` Sam Ravnborg
2007-02-08 22:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-08 22:53 ` Roman Zippel [this message]
2007-02-08 23:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-02-08 23:20 ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-09 2:29 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-02-08 23:03 ` Kbuild refactoring (Re: The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH]) Oleg Verych
2007-02-09 0:06 ` The who needs reviews anyways [PATCH] Andreas Schwab
2007-02-09 1:21 ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-09 5:22 ` Oleg Verych
2007-02-09 11:35 ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-09 21:42 ` Oleg Verych
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.64.0702082335150.14457@scrub.home \
--to=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olecom@flower.upol.cz \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.