From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mo-p00-ob.rzone.de (mo-p00-ob.rzone.de [81.169.146.161]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D383B1007D1 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2010 01:20:50 +1000 (EST) Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:20:40 +0200 From: Olaf Hering To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] [powerpc] do not expect executable permissions for in-tree shell scripts Message-ID: <20100610152040.GA30274@aepfle.de> References: <20100605081039.GA21300@aepfle.de> <20100605133210.11f504c3@opus.seanm.ca> <20100605174437.GA16229@aepfle.de> <20100605140010.653d9f6e@opus.seanm.ca> <1276151189.1962.47.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <1276151189.1962.47.camel@pasglop> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, stable@kernel.org, Sean MacLennan List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Jun 10, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > I still don't like it very much.. why not chmod'ing it +x instead ? :-) I looked at a few other scripts in the source tree, they are called with $(CONFIG_SHELL) , or perl , or awk or even sh . So my change adds some sort of consistency and makes packaging more robust. Olaf