From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 21 12:56:31 2010 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 5385B1065674; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:56:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kamikaze@bsdforen.de) Received: from mail.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [212.204.60.79]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 091428FC14; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:56:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobileKamikaze.norad (unknown [46.115.25.98]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193B68A222D; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:56:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C46EE76.10206@bsdforen.de> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:56:22 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100627 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe References: <4C42CFDA.3040409@comclark.com> <4C42D292.208@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4C4388D2.30200@comclark.com> <20100720190602.GA32624@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <4C465E14.1060300@comclark.com> In-Reply-To: <4C465E14.1060300@comclark.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Doug Barton , Peter Jeremy , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Janne Snabb Subject: Re: [new port] usage of shar command 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: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:56:31 -0000 On 21/07/2010 04:40, Joe wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote: >> >>> The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous >>> (and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often >>> difficult to distinguish from quotes. >>> >>> Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backticks)", IMO, it is >>> far easier to write $(find port_dir) - which is syntactically the >>> same but visually more obvious. >> >> That's a fair point. Do you think that the text as it currently exists >> is sufficiently clear, or do you think that it still needs the >> modification you're suggesting? I'm happy to make the change (or >> someone else can if they so desire) if that's what people thing is the >> right way to go. >> >> >> Doug >> > The text as its currently exists is a long way from being clear to a > first timer. And I am talking about the new change that just went in. > > "shar `find port_dir` (note the backticks)", > > or > > "shar $(find port_dir)" This one doesn't work in (t)csh, the backticks do. > both address the problem nicely. > > By all means go and make the correction. Object! Regards -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?