<div dir="ltr">This is fine with me.<div><br></div><div>I started this process long ago as well, and would make the recommendation that if you use BASH, keep the bashisms to BASH 2.03 or lower.</div><div><br></div><div>If you script wtih BASH 2 as the lowest common denominator, you'll find that most systems are supported (even Solaris 8 -- BASH 2.03b).</div>
<div><br></div><div>Erik is right, you can definitely simplify many of the tests and source many of the duplicated functions/code that currently exist.</div><div><br></div><div>Long story short, I'm all for it.</div></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Ralph Giles <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:giles@thaumas.net" target="_blank">giles@thaumas.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 13-09-15 3:25 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:<br>
<br>
> I'm thingking og switching all the test scripts to use /bin/bash<br>
<br>
</div>Fine with me.<br>
<br>
In theory you can do useful functions with portable shell, but it's a<br>
testing burden, as you say.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
-r<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
flac-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:flac-dev@xiph.org">flac-dev@xiph.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>