incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <>
Subject Re: Does anyone build AOO under *csh?
Date Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:41:36 GMT
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'.

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.

> Herbert


"Follow your bliss."
         -- attributed to Joseph Campbell

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message