Re: [PATCH] Fixed non portable use of expr and removed incorrect use of test -eq for string comparison

["Uwe Kleine-König" <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de>]

Hello Junio,

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> writes:
> 
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> By the way, I do not know if the use of "which" there is
> >> portable.  Have Solaris folks tried this program ever?
> > I don't count myself to "Solaris folks", even though I still use it to
> > read and write my email.  But anyhow I know some of the pitfalls...
> >
> > 	login@~ > /bin/bash --version
> > 	GNU bash, version 3.00.16(1)-release (sparc-sun-solaris2.10)
> > 	Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> >
> > 	login@~ > /bin/bash
> >
> > 	zeisberg@login ~$ which httpd && echo successful
> > 	no httpd in /home/zeisberg/bin /home/zeisberg/usr/bin /opt/bin
> > 	/usr/local/graphics/bin /usr/local/gnu/bin /usr/local/bin
> > 	/usr/local/X11R6/bin /usr/xpg4/bin /usr/bin /usr/ccs/bin /usr/sbin
> > 	/usr/ucb /usr/openwin/bin
> > 	successful
> 
> Thanks.  Somebody else tried:
> 
> 	found=`which "$command"`
>         if test -n "$found"
>         then
>         	... use $found as the full path to the command
> 	fi
> 
> and got burned because "no httpd in ..." comes to the stdout!
That was someting I planed to mention in my email but obviously I
forgot.

> I did not exactly recall if there was an issue with the exit
> status, but your demonstration shows that the status is also
> useless.
> 
> We _could_ do something ugly and pointless like:
> 
> 	test -f `which "$command"`
> 
> but I'd say I prefer the alternative I sent out at that point.
Ack.

-- 
Uwe Kleine-König

http://www.google.com/search?q=gravity+on+earth%3D