Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-lib: show missing prereq summary

[Fabian Stelzer <fs@gigacodes.de>]

On 15.11.2021 09:53, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> +if test -n "$missing_prereq"
>>> +then
>>> +	unique_missing_prereq=$(
>>> +		echo $missing_prereq |
>>> +		tr -s "," "\n" |
>>> +		grep -v '^$' |
>>> +		sort -u |
>>> +		paste -s -d ',')
>>
>> What is paste? Some out-of-tree debugging utility?
>
>https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/paste.html
>
>Don't feel bad for not knowing it.  I usually do not use cut or paste
>myself and I had to look it up the other day while reviewing the RFC
>phase of this series.
>
>I am not sure '\n' is a good idea from portability perspective.  I
>thought I wrote '\012' in the illustration in my review?

Yes, i was wondering why you did that. When i played around with your
variant i used \n since it's what i commonly use and find more readable.
And i'm by far no expert on partability. What platforms would have an
issue with \n ?

I'll take a look at Ævars generate-cmdlist code and will use \012 in a
reroll.

Thanks