incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <>
Subject Re: Does anyone build AOO under *csh?
Date Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:51:01 GMT
On 02/22/12 12:41, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Herbert Duerr<>  wrote:
>> On 21.02.2012 16:59, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>> On 02/21/12 10:15, Herbert Duerr wrote:
>>>> No objection to your plan but in general I do dislike the excessive
>>>>> dependence we have on bash. Perhaps you can clean the bash
>>>>> script too? It doesn't look too bad:
>>>> [...]
>>> Aliases were absent from theBourne shell
>>> <**Bourne_shell<>>,
>>> which had the more powerful
>>> facility of functions. The alias concept was imported intoBourne Again
>>> Shell<**Bash_%28Unix_shell%29<>>(bash)
>>> and
>>> theKorn shell<**Korn_shell<>
>>>> (ksh).
>>> So I think we cannot count on having alias for older bin/sh.
>> Ah yes, thanks. Reworking the build process to work on all shells is a
>> goal I don't want to attack though; doing that may be an idea for
>> volunteers who enjoy getting intimate knowledge of the challenges and
>> problems of the build process in a huge multi-platform project.
>> I'd just like to get rid of the script that gets built for *csh out of the
>> way, as it is in the source root and being named similar to its counterpart
>> leads to confusion IMHO.
> as an FYI...looking at the man page for "sh" on (FreeBSD)
> indicates "alias" IS supported in "sh". I don't know what the internal
> "version" is of sh on this system. Not do I know WHEN support for "alias"
> was added to "sh'.

We do have a pretty capable maintainer for FreeBSD's shell. I am thinking
more of the /bin/sh as comes preinstalled on Solaris and other (probably
extint?) unices around.

FWIW, with the help of the "checkbashims" script I did a cleanup of all
the other scripts that depended on "bin/bash" in OpenOffice but still it
seems something was missed in and I had to move it
back to bash for Solaris sparc.

> In response to your original question, Herbert...yeah, maybe a good time to
> get rid of
> *csh dependencies...I think all *nix systems, regardless of variant, ship
> with "sh" or point it to something reasonable.
tcsh is pretty well maintained still. The author is a well respected
developer in NetBSD.


View raw message