| From: | Jason Tishler <jason(at)tishler(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pgsql-Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_regress.sh startup failure patch |
| Date: | 2002-01-03 19:28:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20020103192842.GA1380@dothill.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom,
On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 11:47:06AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Code up a patch, test it, send in a diff ...
Is the attached patch acceptable?
> I think the only real risk
> here is to be careful not to write anything unportable. I believe that
> "until" loops exist even in very old Bourne shells, does anyone think
> differently?
I just checked one of my old favorites, "The UNIX Programming
Environment," by Kernighan and Pike, 1984. It appears that "until"
is understood by the Bourne shell back then, so its use should be OK.
Thanks,
Jason
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pg_regress.sh2.diff | text/plain | 781 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ross Thomas | 2002-01-03 20:38:37 | Re: Patch for ODBC driver (look for odbc.ini in more than |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-01-03 18:21:23 | Re: Updated TODO item |