[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.patches/8788/focus=8811> ]
Hello Sven, below is a question regarding your shell pages. * Paolo Bonzini wrote on Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:07:12PM CET: > > > Esp., I'm quite sure that we need the cat here-document fallback; > > [...] I am quite concerned that this patch will break > > some of the older systems. > There are two possible objections to the patch: > > 1) portability. I looked again at Sven Mascheck's pages, and you're > probably thinking of http://www.in-ulm.de/~mascheck/various/uuoc/ where > he says: > > Here documents [used with cat] force `as-is' output, if there are > character sequences which are special to echo(1), and if printf(1) is > not available". > > cat<<EOF > $VARIABLE > EOF Actually, this is not what I remember the code to be. > And this actually tells me: if we don't find an easy printf (either > builtin or the first in the path) that works, there is no need to search > *all* printf and *all* shells, we could use a shell function like > > func_fallback_echo() > { > cat <<_LTEOF > $1 (or $*) > _LTEOF > } IIRC then it would have to be something like this: func_fallback_echo() { eval 'cat <<_LTEOF $* _LTEOF' } in order to prevent some shells from expanding $* already at function definition time; but I don't remember for certain. And IIRC I learned this on your pages, Sven, but cannot find it any more now. Can you enlighten us? Was that eval unneeded after all? Thanks! Ralf
