Re: Libtool-patches Digest, Vol 25, Issue 12

[Akim Demaille]

>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:

 >> Well, that reminds me when portability myths existed in the Autoconf
 >> world.  Most were untrue, including those on functions.

 > SVR 3 Bourne shell:
 > $ echo $( ls )
 > Syntax error: `(' not expected.

Thanks!  How old is this system?


 >> Can anybody _prove_ that a shell onto which libtool runs (with all its
 >> functions etc.) does _not_ support $()?

 > Above mentioned shell has functions, but hangs on libtool's configure
 > script, so I guess it doesn't count as proof (I did not try to find out
 > what the problem was).

Indeed, it doesn't count, but it is worth knowing, thanks.

 > http://multivac.cwru.edu/lintsh/ mentiones the problem for some
 > Solaris sh, and http://www.in-ulm.de/~mascheck/various/shells/
 > lists various other possible problem candidates (where there might
 > not be a suitable shell installed).  No, neither of this is proof.

 > Other than that, a problem ("feature") that comes up in case of
 > converting `..` style to $(..) is the difference w.r.t backslashes:
 > $ echo $(echo '\$') `echo '\$'`
 > \$ $

That's definitely a feature!