Re: More than 10% of all Fedora spec files are not POSIX sh compliant

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

 



On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 at 20:47, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[..]
[Also when giving one graph for one type of build, could you also give a similar graph showing how it looks with dash or ksh or whatever you used?]

Graph for the gcc will be exactly the same. Only overall time will be shorter.
ksh93 is not the good replacement candidate. I've tested it with gcc and using it causes that whole build freezes at some point. I've started my testy from ksh and this is why I've took next on the alphabetic list which was mksh.
Maybe it is only some issue with Fedora version and latest ksh93 is fixed .. really I don't care about that as better POSIX sh alternatives are around.

kloczek
-- 
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux