From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas De Schampheleire Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2014 16:59:51 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] infra: fix autotools .la fixing when no .la files are present In-Reply-To: <20140706144147.GB3684@free.fr> References: <297a83abd0584662acb7.1404656584@localhost> <20140706144147.GB3684@free.fr> Message-ID: <5603c98c-69ac-403d-bf91-48cf0cdee841@email.android.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net "Yann E. MORIN" schreef: >Thomas, All, > >On 2014-07-06 16:23 +0200, Thomas De Schampheleire spake thusly: >> Commit 6f638ea9c9c7bacc646430a74ad3dd2740eae676 ("infra: /usr support: >> STAGING_DIR can be outside BASE_DIR") changed a for-construct around 'sed >> -i' in a 'find | xargs sed -i'. However, if the find returns no results, >> sed complains with: >> '/bin/sed: no input files' >> >> Since a for construct is not very nice to handle this case, this commit >> changes the 'find | xargs sed -i' into 'find -exec sed -i'. > >Why not use: 'xargs -r' instead? > > --no-run-if-empty > -r If the standard input does not contain any nonblanks, do > not run the command. Normally, the command is run once > even if there is no input. This option is a GNU extension. > >Using 'find -exec' is OK, but it spawns a process for each result. I >doubt we end up in a case with trillions of results, so the overhead >should not be noticeable. Aha, I didn't know this option. I did know about the overhead difference, but at least the -exec should be on par with the for loop. I'll resubmit with this -r instead, thanks! Best regards, Thomas