From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 1 05:55:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C8591065673; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 05:55:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alp@rsu.ru) Received: from mail.r61.net (mail.r61.net [195.208.245.238]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F218FC23; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 05:55:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pyhalov.cc.rsu.ru (pyhalov.cc.rsu.ru [195.208.255.102]) (Authenticated sender: alp@sfedu.ru) by mail.r61.net (MTA) with ESMTPSA id D029B3A1705; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 09:55:51 +0400 (MSK) Message-ID: <4FC85967.8010300@rsu.ru> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:55:51 +0400 From: Alexander Pyhalov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110306 Thunderbird/3.1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Barton References: <4E946838-4F3B-421A-839E-05E1A01464AB@FreeBSD.org> <4FC81F15.5010008@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4FC81F15.5010008@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.7 (mail.r61.net [0.0.0.0]); Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:55:51 +0400 (MSK) Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Marcus von Appen , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Alexander Pronin Subject: Re: [ GSOC ] Differences in shell behaviour X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 05:55:54 -0000 Hello. On 06/01/2012 05:47, Doug Barton wrote: > On 5/31/2012 12:21 PM, Alexander Pronin wrote: >> But, is it suitable to write sh script for 9.0, that does not work in 8.3? > > No. Our tools need to work in all supported versions of FreeBSD, which > at this time includes 7 as well. I see two points... First one is that parallel building is an optional feature wich can be made conditionally available for systems with $OSVERSION >= 900000. The second one is the following. Is the difference in sh behavior intentional? Can it be considered a bug and thus the right thing is to fix it in FreeBSD 7/8? However, as it leads to difference in shell behavior, it can be undesirable. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University