tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marek Czernek <>
Subject Re: Bug 62140 implementation question
Date Tue, 02 Oct 2018 14:56:10 GMT
Well, I personally would prefer if it was  a soure-able (or call-able 
for windows) script; otherwise, you'd have to parse the text file to 
check which part of the text you want to output, since you don't want to 
output all the text at once, but only for one particular verb.

Any particular benefits for a text file over two scripts? It's true it's 
single-sourced, but given that all scripts are essentially duplicated 
into .sh and .bat, I don't feel like that outweighs the ease of use and 
extensibility of the help script files.

On 10/2/18 4:45 PM, Mitch Claborn wrote:
> Are the available verbs the same for both .sh and .bat? If so, perhaps 
> a text file that contains the actual help text that could be output 
> from both .bat and .sh.
> Mitch
> On 10/01/2018 02:48 PM, Marek Czernek wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> I'd like to resolve Bug 62140 [0]. I just wanted to gather some 
>> opinions about the implementation details. In my mind, the following 
>> solution is quite reasonable:
>> 1. Create new help scripts, such as and help.bat. These files
>>     contain a method for each functional verb that prints some info
>>     about the verb and exits with 0.
>> 2. Source the files in both and catalina.bat
>> 3. When user enters catalina.[sh|bat] $verb help (or -h, --help?),
>>     execute one of the methods.
>> In my mind, the above solution is quite straightforward. Any gotchas, 
>> or obvious problems?
>> [0]
>> Cheers,
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Marek Czernek

JWS/JBCS Associate Quality Engineer, RHCA

Find me at

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