From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764764AbYA1Xgf (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:36:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755397AbYA1Xg1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:36:27 -0500 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([140.211.166.183]:54649 "EHLO smtp.gentoo.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751632AbYA1Xg0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:36:26 -0500 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: [LTP] [TEST] : LTP Build failure on 2.6.24 kernel Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:36:23 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net, risrajak@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1201508081.4029.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200801281621.02758.vapier@gentoo.org> <20080128214642.GD8767@does.not.exist> In-Reply-To: <20080128214642.GD8767@does.not.exist> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1532033.ZkXrdRiGx2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200801281836.24792.vapier@gentoo.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart1532033.ZkXrdRiGx2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 28 January 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:21:01PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Monday 28 January 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 03:43:16PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > On Monday 28 January 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 06:53:15AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > > > On Monday 28 January 2008, Rishikesh K. Rajak wrote: > > > > > > > Here i am getting failure on the x86_64 machine with new > > > > > > > kernel. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the uname for that machine: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rishi@:~/ltp-full-20071231# uname -a > > > > > > > Linux rishi.in.ibm.com 2.6.24 #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 28 > > > > > > > 06:47:28 UTC 2008 x86_64 GNU/Linux > > > > > > > > > > > > i'm guessing you're using ubuntu and thus dash is your /bin/sh > > > > > > ... shouldnt be a 2.6.24 issue > > > > > > > > > > > > > make[4]: Entering directory > > > > > > > `/root/ltp-full-20071231/testcases/network/tcp_cmds/ftp' > > > > > > > ../../generate.sh > > > > > > > ../../generate.sh: 60: arith: syntax error: "cnt=3Dcnt-1" > > > > > > > > > > > > sadly, this is becoming a FAQ. ubuntu ships a broken /bin/sh > > > > > > (dash) and thus some LTP scripts fall apart. i would prefer to > > > > > > not change the scripts as the message is simple in LTP: fix your > > > > > > shell, dont add hacks to LTP. otherwise we slowly back ourselv= es > > > > > > into this corner with the shell scripts where we try to support > > > > > > every craptastic shell out there and we're afraid to make any > > > > > > changes because we dont know what crappy shell is going to drop= a > > > > > > brick. LTP scripts are written to be POSIX complaint and only > > > > > > POSIX complaint shells should be provided by /bin/sh. > > > > > > > > > > You better fulfil your claim "LTP scripts are written to be POSIX > > > > > complaint" before complaining about shells being unhappy with your > > > > > script. E.g. where in IEEE 1003.1-2004 is the "local" you use > > > > > specified? > > > > > > > > yes, local is a bsd extension not in POSIX. it has been implemented > > > > by every shell so far though. as soon as someone complains, i'll be > > > > more than happy to fix it. > > > > > > David Korn's ksh93 (e.g. shipped in the Debian "ksh" package) disprov= es > > > your claim "it has been implemented by every shell so far". > > > > sorry, i left out the operative word "relevant". i dont care what rand= om > > shell fails unless people are actually utilizing it as their /bin/sh in > > any sort of useful context. as soon as someone complains for real and > > not just to be annoying, i'll address their complaint then. > >... > > You started with claiming "LTP scripts are written to be POSIX > complaint" and now that I've shown you a not that uncommon IEEE POSIX > 1003.2 compliant shell that can't cope with your non-POSIX script you > suddenly introduce the word "relevant". what's your point ? LTP scripts are POSIX compliant with a little extra th= at=20 so far has worked fine for everyone actually running LTP. as soon as the=20 little extra realistically becomes a problem, i'll rework things. you have= nt=20 shown a realistic system. i'm willing to tweak things for real LTP users,= =20 not people being tools. > But when you care only about "relevant" shells you could simply > implementing my suggestion of placing a #!/bin/bash at the top of your > scripts instead of defining your own POSIX superset that you require > from a /bin/sh for allowing a user to execute your script... no. people run LTP on embedded systems w/out bash. =2Dmike --nextPart1532033.ZkXrdRiGx2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUAR55m+EFjO5/oN/WBAQIu2hAAgyHTslpnE6iBk9UqgOf5C4plqaj66HiM 0e0UogqBaKfrf++fHfGpLHssPf0EqCdxvCDNsv8yxj7Rh6S6lrj9J2amVKT1nAy5 2wbIRHOgEmsrGi/2LB2JgyC1EVWlMnMTiXYbfsGkjI8Aa3v4I1VsnBsiQrJbY2F2 mSio3qjrzOgq0+ZixBhAgJuUseXrlZnyWf9Pj9p90xZT9GgytDRJk9NI5NzYO3Qw X6vh3w2RINtQhSv9NZAVpMBufoOunO+Rv4ZinrvCacYJsr5a7ZIzRm/bdCqNrJtA 9vboOj9ATd0Zk+mrYaY85cxSkQKj104c/48yRTlJD2Bux33zRjgHXOX7jcYN2tjn 6dLk+QbBN3iBlJoEWSi2Ederau5UtW0T6xWUQoxOC9wcAZkXTSI/dPIDjO+j94/J dPSuSjePKYQFXMOIv3sFEsloplQimD3Dkwwi3weP+YSSeVJbtk2atcuWsY+saQuo E2SkUuTiPTNMti8KQ7FBqpbQnPc29nWU2cblz9o8lAdePZKhlBVKfu0O3II0MV30 OF5JpkjS7dROqp5iZWJkUCQCrd89viaITZejDp/r/wJFzFiIf+jaGfmCloNos12w d+JKcIUAM5BkwR3xuBcBUDZOpBm+0N2TtgJITOwVJeCE6L+AEHt3zDZIP3IxAU3j KBJau8TKPw4= =NtNh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1532033.ZkXrdRiGx2--