Gentoo Archives: gentoo-alt

From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
To: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-alt] Patch for openssl config script -- but not really
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:33:36
Message-Id: 20101223143232.GL4198@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-alt] Patch for openssl config script -- but not really by Perry Smith
On 23-12-2010 08:26:32 -0600, Perry Smith wrote:
> On Dec 23, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > It should be IIRC, based on FEATURES=interactive. Anyway, if /bin/sh is > > an issue on AIX, perhaps we better run their configure script with > > Prefix'/bootstrap's bash instead? > > Seems like to get any type of wide spread stability between platforms and > releases, you would want to use as few native elements as possible. So,
We try to do this as much as is reasonable. I think haubi backed up most of that :) Prefix is indeed fully self-containing for this reason, although on other platforms this may feel like a complete waste.
> using a bash that you have control over seems wise in the long term. The > question is if this config script uses anything in ksh that isn't in bash. I would > assume not since many /bin/sh's point to bash on other platforms (mac for > example). > > The other thing is to be sure that the shell knows that it is running a script > and is not interactive. If you passed bash the wrong flag, I bet it would > make the same mistake and read input in raw mode so that the user could > do command line editing (which you don't want in this case).
I'm not sure if I understand this well. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-alt] Patch for openssl config script -- but not really Perry Smith <pedzsan@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-alt] Patch for openssl config script -- but not really Michael Haubenwallner <haubi@g.o>