Hi Sam! On 2024-12-06T09:34:32+0000, Sam James <s...@gentoo.org> wrote: > The script has #!/bin/sh shebang (and hence must have POSIX shell > compatibility), but the patch introduces uses of the 'local' keyword > which isn't in POSIX. > > While many shells do have the 'local' keyword, its behaviour isn't > portable across those either, which is why it's likely it'll never > be added to POSIX :(
Right, but I intentionally picked the form that I thought was supported by all reasonable '/bin/sh's: 'local [name]', without any further adornement. For example, per <https://mywiki.wooledge.org/Bashism>: | 'local' is mandated by the LSB and Debian policy specifications, though only the 'local varname' (not 'local var=value') syntax is specified. Portable, reliable shell programming is a nice idea, but then, reality check... (Don't ask me how much time I already spent on this simple script, to get it into its current form -- and I'd consider myself well-versed in shell programming...) I was inclined to just rewrite it in Python, what do you think? In my opinion, a GCC-build-time Python dependency is not a problem for '--target=nvptx-none', as that one's not in the bootstrapping chain? Grüße Thomas
