[ccache] [PATCH] Use bash for test.sh.

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 06 November 2012 11:53:12 Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 6 November 2012 04:54, Andrew Stubbs <ams at codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > While it is true that "/usr/bin/env bash" is more portable than
> > "/bin/bash", I also don't like it as much.
> > 
> > If I run a "#!/bin/bash" script without bash installed I get:
> >   /bin/bash: bad interpreter: No such file or directory
> > 
> > If I try the same with "#!/usr/bin/env bash" I get:
> >   /bin/env: bad interpreter: No such file or directory
> 
> Perhaps you should get a better version of env?

ironic considering you're espousing a change to support crap systems that 
aren't relevant.  if the script is written in bash and is intended to be, then 
/bin/bash is the correct answer.  if the script is intended to be POSIX shell, 
then /bin/sh is the correct answer.  using env is just stupid.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/ccache/attachments/20121110/92f634b3/attachment.pgp>