From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix, from userid 118) id 4581DE008CD; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:47:41 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on yocto-www.yoctoproject.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,PLING_QUERY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-HAM-Report: * 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider * (twoerner[at]gmail.com) * -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low * trust * [209.85.223.180 listed in list.dnswl.org] * -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature * 1.0 PLING_QUERY Subject has exclamation mark and question mark Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com (mail-ie0-f180.google.com [209.85.223.180]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5856E0080C for ; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 06:47:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f180.google.com with SMTP id rp18so15258988iec.11 for ; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 06:47:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h+NYWFcUm1cVgqaoCTqZLTmoh0Dl212cKnPVAIPc3SE=; b=JG3Nb/Z3Cz6Rt+RFsDBCtIBnss8cu4m9kqDWSVC/DTFc1mAYwpm8STfoajeLLxJu+Z cg+jsCkcfgLT3yVhMbqYI5Wc90f2lBcAdv3W2gHRhPC7S0QEZtSgYvWPLj0xy3LMhcQa ypTxnSyUuvZ88s7R4XXzFeQZ41Pb1JmNPpAW+w1hJU5Fr7lIpvcvQNdDi2CP+NH4C0Jp y8ju+KaxcChzwSzk2/Q6gKNE0MdMGO4zHLO8kWRL98QggRCfYYHGsdLxqxDq+4KDC/+F bS2wnZFzOoTg+WTGQsHHtn2DQvgqf5siqJ078Ytj7vliazvYhQCVruBi4aoS5HQMqc90 UaXg== X-Received: by 10.107.9.213 with SMTP id 82mr15378268ioj.45.1420814846230; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 06:47:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.141.85] ([67.55.37.231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id q10sm4185700iga.12.2015.01.09.06.47.24 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Jan 2015 06:47:25 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <54AFE9FA.3020103@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:47:22 -0500 From: Trevor Woerner User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert P. J. Day" , Yocto discussion list References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: do pkg_postinst() scripts need to start with "#!/bin/sh -e"? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 14:47:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/09/15 08:42, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jan 2015, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > >> more manual pedantry -- dev manual, section 5.3.16, suggests: >> >> A post-installation function has the following structure: >> >> pkg_postinst_PACKAGENAME() { >> #!/bin/sh -e >> # Commands to carry out >> } >> >> except that every example of a pkg_postinst() script i've ever seen >> does not contain that initial hash-bang line, so the manual should >> at least be reworded to be consistent with the code base. > i take it back, i just ran across this example in base-passwd.bb: > > pkg_postinst_${PN}-update () { > #!/bin/sh > if [ -n "$D" ]; then > exit 0 > fi > ${sbindir}/update-passwd > } > > which (naturally) doesn't use the "-e" option :-). anyway, what does > one suggest for consistency across the manual and code base? Let me be the first (of many, no doubt!) to suggest: #!/bin/bash *ducks* :-)