From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: Ribust shell-based test for DJGPP?
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2000 18:52:22 +0100
Message-ID: <NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHEEBNCAAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
In-Reply-To: <200012281705.MAA15787@envy.delorie.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id MAA29559
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> No, it isn't required, but they probably all do have it.  Even $DJDIR
> isn't required.
So the test as is will DTRT in, say, 99% of all cases? I suppose that's
good enough.

> What about uname?
I'd like the test to incur as little overhead as possible. uname is an
external program, while 'test' is a builtin in most shells.
Also, many of the patches are DJGPP-specific, and uname simply claims
'MS-DOS', which doesn't necessarily mean it's a DJGPP system.