Re: t6044 broken on pu

> Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> writes:
>
>> May a  simple
>>  printf "1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n6\n7\n8\n9\n10\n"
>>
>> be an option ?
>
> If you were to do that, at least have the decency to make it more
> readable by doing something like:
>
>         printf "%s\n" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
>
> ;-)
>
> But as I said, as a response to "t6044 broken on pu" bug report,
> s/seq/test_seq/ is the only sensible change.
>
> Improving "test_seq, the alternative to seq" is a separate topic.
>
> If you have aversion to $PERL, perhaps do them without using
> anything what is not expected to be built-in in modern shells,
> perhaps like this?
>
>  t/test-lib-functions.sh | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/test-lib-functions.sh b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> index 8d99eb3..4edddac 100644
> --- a/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> +++ b/t/test-lib-functions.sh
> @@ -739,7 +739,12 @@ test_seq () {
>         2)      ;;
>         *)      error "bug in the test script: not 1 or 2 parameters to test_seq" ;;
>         esac
> -       perl -le 'print for $ARGV[0]..$ARGV[1]' -- "$@"
> +       test_seq_counter__=$1
> +       while test "$test_seq_counter__" -le $2
> +       do
> +               echo "$test_seq_counter__"
> +               test_seq_counter__=$((test_seq_counter__ + 1))
> +       done
>  }