Re: [PATCH] More changes to the better-shell test

[Paolo Bonzini]

Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Paolo Bonzini on 10/30/2008 3:27 AM:
>> 1) avoiding a walk of the entire PATH is one of the first shells passes
>> the test (patches 1-2);
> 
>> 2) not running the suggested tests for $SHELL in case we reach that
>> point (patch 2);
> 
> I see you already committed this, but...

Aargh.  I pushed while doing "rebase -i", and thought it would only push
the last commit.  Instead it works on a detached head, so it pushed the
state of the master branch before rebasing.

>> _AS_CR_PREPARE is useless in most scripts
>
> Actually, it is NOT useless.  But all of
> these features independently AS_REQUIRE([_AS_CR_PREPARE]), so we are
> merely lowering the point at which it is emitted (in particular,
> _AS_SHELL_SANITIZE does _not_ use it).

Yeah, I meant "useless because required already".  In particular
_AS_LINENO_PREPARE requires as_cr_*, but not _AS_LINENO_WORKS.

Except for _AS_PREPARE as you pointed out, which I fixed (that was due
to a conflict with another patch, that did not turn out to give any
savings).

>> +       esac],
>> +      [AS_IF([{ test -f "$SHELL" || test -f "$SHELL.exe"; } &&
>> +          _AS_RUN(["$as_required"], ["$SHELL"])],
>> +         [CONFIG_SHELL=$SHELL as_have_required=yes])])
> 
> No checking for suggested features on $SHELL?  On the other hand, that
> makes sense; $SHELL is our last-ditch attempt, so it either passes
> required tests or the user is hosed, no need worrying about suggested tests.

Indeed I thought the same.

Paolo