[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: simple useful functions

From: Stefan Monnier
Subject: Re: simple useful functions
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:23:21 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

>> IIUC these scripts are written for /bin/sh, right?  How do (t)csh users
>> handle that?
>> [ Sorry, I'm not that familiar with cross-compiling: OpenWRT is about
>> as far as I got into this, and it "takes care of things" in ways
>> I haven't tried to understand.  They don't use such setup scripts, at
>> least in a user-visible way (although the user does perform the
>> cross-compiling).  ]

> Those scripts are written for the shell the tool provider intends user
> to use.  The shell to use is not always our choice.

In the case of the scripts you've used, was there some way to
mechanically figure out which shell was intended?  I'm thinking that
using shell-file-name is probably not the right choice, and we should
instead default to /bin/sh (which I'd expect to be the most common

> This is a good point.  I am contaminating the whole emacs.  It made me
> review compile.el and I learned the existence of
> compilation-environment which I think is more appropriate than
> `setenv' function.

So only `compile' needs to know about these env-vars?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]