From: Fabian Stelzer Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 19:56:09 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-lib: show missing prereq summary Message-ID: <20211115195609.g6vq6qfjhyootcqt@fs> In-Reply-To: On 15.11.2021 09:53, Junio C Hamano wrote: >Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >>> +if test -n "$missing_prereq" >>> +then >>> + unique_missing_prereq=$( >>> + echo $missing_prereq | >>> + tr -s "," "\n" | >>> + grep -v '^$' | >>> + sort -u | >>> + paste -s -d ',') >> >> What is paste? Some out-of-tree debugging utility? > >https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/paste.html > >Don't feel bad for not knowing it. I usually do not use cut or paste >myself and I had to look it up the other day while reviewing the RFC >phase of this series. > >I am not sure '\n' is a good idea from portability perspective. I >thought I wrote '\012' in the illustration in my review? Yes, i was wondering why you did that. When i played around with your variant i used \n since it's what i commonly use and find more readable. And i'm by far no expert on partability. What platforms would have an issue with \n ? I'll take a look at Ævars generate-cmdlist code and will use \012 in a reroll. Thanks