Re: POSIX woes in t7810.87: dash bash or bash dash?
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jun 20, 2011, 23:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vwrgg9j1n.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20110620232425.GA617@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 21 quoted lines
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 02:46:08PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/t/t7810-grep.sh b/t/t7810-grep.sh
>> index 69bd576..6379ad6 100755
>> --- a/t/t7810-grep.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7810-grep.sh
>> @@ -658,9 +658,9 @@ test_expect_success LIBPCRE 'grep -P -v pattern' '
>> '
>>
>> test_expect_success LIBPCRE 'grep -P -i pattern' '
>> - {
>> - echo "hello.c: printf(\"Hello world.\n\");"
>> - } >expected &&
>> + cat >expected <<-EOF &&
>> + hello.c: printf("Hello world.\n");
>> + EOF
>
> Do you need to quote EOF to suppress expansion in the here document?
> Both bash and dash seem to pass unknown backslash-escapes like "\n"
> through unharmed, but I don't know if that is portable (they do both
> munge known escapes like "\\", of course).I do not think that is strictly necessary, as we are not in the corner of non-portable echo behaviour anymore, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.