# [PATCH] Use printf rather than echo -n. 3 messages from 2005-12-06 to 2005-12-07. Participants: Jason Riedy, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/2761 ## Jason Riedy, 2005-12-06 22:21 Subject: [PATCH] Use printf rather than echo -n. Message-ID: <20512.1133907712@lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20512.1133907712%40lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU ``` On AIX, there is no -n option to the system's echo. Instead, it needs the '\c' control character. We could replace echo -n "foo" with echo -e "foo\c" but printf is recommended by most man pages. Tested on AIX 5.3, Solaris 8, and Debian. Signed-off-by: E. Jason Riedy --- git-am.sh | 2 +- git-applypatch.sh | 2 +- git-bisect.sh | 2 +- git-status.sh | 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) 58ad3dda17daa0577fda5204f75bbc846cf7d7ea diff --git a/git-am.sh b/git-am.sh index 660b3a4..6ed527c 100755 --- a/git-am.sh +++ b/git-am.sh @@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ do echo "--------------------------" cat "$dotest/final-commit" echo "--------------------------" - echo -n "Apply? [y]es/[n]o/[e]dit/[v]iew patch/[a]ccept all " + printf "Apply? [y]es/[n]o/[e]dit/[v]iew patch/[a]ccept all " read reply case "$reply" in [yY]*) action=yes ;; diff --git a/git-applypatch.sh b/git-applypatch.sh index 4c577eb..a112e1a 100755 --- a/git-applypatch.sh +++ b/git-applypatch.sh @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ while [ "$interactive" = yes ]; do echo "--------------------------" cat "$final" echo "--------------------------" - echo -n "Apply? [y]es/[n]o/[e]dit/[a]ccept all " + printf "Apply? [y]es/[n]o/[e]dit/[a]ccept all " read reply case "$reply" in y|Y) interactive=no;; diff --git a/git-bisect.sh b/git-bisect.sh index 68838f3..05dae8a 100755 --- a/git-bisect.sh +++ b/git-bisect.sh @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ bisect_start() { rm -rf "$GIT_DIR/refs/bisect/" mkdir "$GIT_DIR/refs/bisect" { - echo -n "git-bisect start" + printf "git-bisect start" sq "$@" } >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_LOG" sq "$@" >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_NAMES" diff --git a/git-status.sh b/git-status.sh index b90ffc1..bf0e66c 100755 --- a/git-status.sh +++ b/git-status.sh @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ report () { trailer="" while read status name newname do - echo -n "$header" + printf "$header" header="" trailer="# " @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ report () { U ) echo "# unmerged: $name";; esac done - echo -n "$trailer" + printf "$trailer" [ "$header" ] } -- 0.99.9.GIT ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2005-12-07 02:04 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use printf rather than echo -n. Message-ID: <7vfyp5zmqe.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vfyp5zmqe.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net In-Reply-To: <20512.1133907712@lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU> ``` Jason Riedy writes: > On AIX, there is no -n option to the system's echo. Instead, > it needs the '\c' control character. We could replace > echo -n "foo" > with > echo -e "foo\c" > but printf is recommended by most man pages. Tested on AIX > 5.3, Solaris 8, and Debian. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Perhaps printf '%s' "$blah" to futureproof, instead of just saying printf "$blah"? While I do not have anything aginst system without "sane" echo, I really do not like it. Not your solution, but *having to do* something like that. metaconfig Configure does "echo $n frotz $c" with n=-n or c=\\c set appropriately; autoconf does the same with $ac_n $ac_c. IIRC, I think ancient autoconf did "echo | tr -d '\012'". These are far worse than a single printf, although they may be more portable. As a traditionalist, if I were doing it myself I would probably pipe echo to tr, but I am lazy so I'd take your patch as is ;-). ``` ## Jason Riedy, 2005-12-07 03:31 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use printf rather than echo -n. Message-ID: <21616.1133926303@lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/21616.1133926303%40lotus.CS.Berkeley.EDU In-Reply-To: <7vfyp5zmqe.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> ``` And Junio C Hamano writes: - Perhaps printf '%s' "$blah" to futureproof, instead of just - saying printf "$blah"? Definitely more likely to stay correct. I'm just lazy. - - While I do not have anything aginst system without "sane" echo, - I really do not like it. Not your solution, but *having to do* - something like that. Um, you think the wrong one is sane. ;) Why should echo in Bourne shell take C-shell arguments? (I blame AT&T for their crappy licensing.) Jason ```