On 05/09/12 19:35, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 12:30:34 +0200
> Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
>
>> You should turn them all in things like:
>>
>> mkdir /sys 2> /dev/null 2>&1
>> cd /sys || {
>> ewarn "<the error message>"
>> return 1
>> }
> That's just a little less racy and certainly not
> atomic, /usr/bin/install would be atomic. As you have said
> your race point doesn't actually matter. You call it plain wrong and
> admit there is nothing wrong at the same time?
Well, the problem here is -
that script will be the only one running, and the only one manipulating
sysfs, and it's fail-safe - if anyone else creates the directory we
still end up in a state where it exists (modulo permissions)

So yes, it's technically racy and could fail, but all failure modes are
benign (directory already there, directory really already there) or
really confusing (we can't create a dir - is / mounted readonly? Why are
we being run then?!), so either it's good or something really bad you
can't catch anyway.

>
> There's another point, shell is easily editable and understandable and
> that's a good thing and not a bad one and also one of arches values I
> believe, hence pacman uses so much shell!
And it's on-the-fly editable. If you just need to disable that check for
a minute because ... err ... long story, but you have to do it ...
trivial. And sh -x gives you an instant "debugger" that makes finding
silly mistakes a lot easier.
>
> On occasions I have had to resort to editing shell init scripts because
> I don't agree with the distro or devs. People shouldn't be forced to
> Gentoo and damaging the environment.
Wat
I presume you got distracted and meant to write something else,
otherwise I have to claim that you are a donkey Thanks for the most
surreal quote of the day (so far)

Take care,

Patrick

The 09/05/12, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2012 12:30:34 +0200
> Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
>
> > You should turn them all in things like:
> >
> > mkdir /sys 2> /dev/null 2>&1
> > cd /sys || {
> > ewarn "<the error message>"
> > return 1
> > }
>
> That's just a little less racy and certainly not
> atomic, /usr/bin/install would be atomic. As you have said
> your race point doesn't actually matter. You call it plain wrong and
> admit there is nothing wrong at the same time?

The way used to handle conditions is wrong. And I admit that for /this/
particular case, this is not much relevant.

> There's another point, shell is easily editable and understandable and
> that's a good thing and not a bad one and also one of arches values I
> believe, hence pacman uses so much shell!

I don't find pacman much editable, sorry. I've given examples of nice
features not easy to implement, here in the past. ,-p

--
Nicolas Sebrecht

On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:45:51 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:

> > On occasions I have had to resort to editing shell init scripts because
> > I don't agree with the distro or devs. People shouldn't be forced to
> > Gentoo and damaging the environment.
> Wat
> I presume you got distracted and meant to write something else,
> otherwise I have to claim that you are a donkey Thanks for the most
> surreal quote of the day (so far

Was it cryptic. I didn't get your humour either?

With init and shell rc. You are guaranteed control and adaptability and
easier understanding of all executions. With systemd you may have to
work within the expected configurations.

Basically, the premise is that a minimal Linux system should be X times
bigger.

This means you may have to recompile like the Gentoo distro to get the
system you want. Like you currently have to do if you want a smaller
kernel.

On Wed, 9 May 2012 13:57:14 +0200
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:

> The way used to handle conditions is wrong. And I admit that for /this/
> particular case, this is not much relevant.
>

I actually prefer the first case with multiple ifs. It helps newbie
techs dive in and read the code. So what if they break it they will
learn fixing it.

> > There's another point, shell is easily editable and understandable and
> > that's a good thing and not a bad one and also one of arches values I
> > believe, hence pacman uses so much shell!
>
> I don't find pacman much editable, sorry. I've given examples of nice
> features not easy to implement, here in the past. ,-p

There are a lot of functions and files to get a handle on
aren't there. Is that the reason? I don't think that detracts from the
point though?