X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=Iv1q7dCcWaso74EI OgPfzCrhLKiWewiESV41YsvzySw+38beHeUtsBZyZaYRVkm+e3GUJ7DHNDfJHcJu 4eutNbI5ZQeeqfp4Zlk6gFAXhTalR7UdNnEyZrIHdBdPiV30SS5R4Hd8Uy2na7wW nOmo632EMnC3nrQ45r7T96t+bfI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=L7NK5rc4uiukwVlAzFdaP1 ym7co=; b=Fakw+bKHFkTBQIei/OutAYlRewbBo6ZT1Mzqz4RtHBTdIx3uoEbIfg M72gFnEHEfM1IQ74EfcbmZ3+e0LFmSY3hTjpr6VjCNVl3CKzM0w/hsNRvn9hOEfH buRDtPGEh7e7D+KtDZ4EZ8ljNJnsNX1vni/8qSfxDKb7HbmQZdYeU= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=4.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_THEBAT,MIME_BASE64_BLANKS,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*UA:Bat!, H*x:Bat!, H*r:sk:postmas, H*r:4.80.1 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: smtp.ht-systems.ru Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 14:10:29 +0300 From: Andrey Repin Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <667681616.20160404141029@yandex.ru> To: Yaakov Selkowitz , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: How to install a custom permanent postinstall handler? In-Reply-To: <57020525.90909@cygwin.com> References: <838469265 DOT 20160401235308 AT yandex DOT ru> <87a8lcicxg DOT fsf AT Rainer DOT invalid> <5700975A DOT 3070002 AT cygwin DOT com> <87y48vqkfx DOT fsf AT Rainer DOT invalid> <57015B97 DOT 3010401 AT cygwin DOT com> <1564992119 DOT 20160404020533 AT yandex DOT ru> <57020525 DOT 90909 AT cygwin DOT com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 X-IsSubscribed: yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id u34BKUO4023330 Greetings, Yaakov Selkowitz! > On 2016-04-03 18:05, Andrey Repin wrote: >> Because, within my reach, Cygwin is the only system that not using DASH as >> /bin/sh. Though, I may try rolling some busybox… > There *is* a world outside of Debian/Ubuntu; I have no doubt in that. > Fedora, RHEL/CentOS, and Arch Linux all use bash for /bin/sh. I tested on CentOS and FreeBSD, CentOS failed for the aforementiond reason(bash!), FreeBSD test succeed, but I were unable to obtain exact version info about used shell. For some reason, /bin/sh doesn't like -V or --version. But it wasn't dash (not present). (The simple test was "/bin/sh -c '_test(){ local -; echo 1;}; _test'.") > However, a simple test in the form of building GCC with dash as /bin/sh, while > noticeably faster, showed that Debian/Ubuntu have yet to fully upstream > their work ("gcc/genmultilib: 261: shift: can't shift that many"). Well, what did you expect shifting nonexistent parameters? POSIX explicitly required[1] that n must not be greater than $#. > As much as the speed difference is promising (and frankly tempting), I'm > afraid we simply don't have the resources to fix everything to work with > dash as /bin/sh. If you want to blame anything, blame your GCC build script. P.S. The same place[2] answered my original question. It doesn't look like "local" is at all defined by POSIX, so using it with /bin/sh scripts is always a risk. [1] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009696699/utilities/shift.html [2] http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009696699/idx/sbi.html -- With best regards, Andrey Repin Monday, April 4, 2016 13:29:38 Sorry for my terrible english...