On 4/6/19 5:34 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 4/6/19 11:22 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>>> But that file ([1]) is 5 years old, so maybe the way the shell -
>>> actually `busybox` - handles (or ignored) a "local" keyword outside of a
>>> function has changed?
>>
>> The installer team just uploaded busybox 1.30 last month [1] which introduced
>> at least one serious bug [2]. Might be that busybox 1.30 broke more stuff.
>
> shellcheck complains about that "local" as well but it claims it's not known
> to the original Unix shell at all:
>
Here it is in glorious testing detail and roaring fans :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIFi_yo12lE
Just advance to 3:00 min mark to skip me mumbling through the boot.
Dennis
