Re: [PATCH] Remove "bashism" from contrib/thunderbird-patch-inline/appp.sh

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Ángel González [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

This is wrong.

Not really.

quoted

You are replacing bash with sh:

quoted

-#!/bin/bash
+#!/bin/sh

but the script still uses bash-specific syntax (aka. bashishms):

Do you mean some of the parts you quoted are bashism?

I was pointing to the $( ) as a bashishm

quoted

quoted

 PATCH=$(zenity --file-selection)

Even though ancient shells I grew up with did not have $(), it is a way
backticks should have been written by Bourne from day one.  Historically,
handling nesting and interraction between double-quotes and backticks
correctly was a nightmare to get right, and different implementations of
shells got them always wrong.  If you use $(), the headaches go away.

These days, we don't know of any POSIX shell that is widely used and does
not understand $().  As such, the above construct is perfectly safe and
even preferred over ``.  Welcome to the 21st century ;-)

The only major platform that didn't have a reasonable shell was Solaris,
but we already have written its /bin/sh off as broken and unusable, and
suggest people to use xpg4 or xpg6 shell (see the Makefile).

I have to agree with you. $() is a much saner syntax. Still, the goal
was portability.
Reading your message, and considering the Solaris note, it might have
been fine as it was. I have also checked the "Shell Command Language"
section of IEEE Std 1003.1 and it does require $() use.

Albeit being a single line I would still change it, it is now a much
weaker position. Thanks for your insight.