On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 12:47 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:58 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 6:44 PM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
> >> > <carenas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > > + local _GLIBC_VERSION=$(getconf GNU_LIBC_VERSION 2>/dev/null)
> >> > > + if echo "$_GLIBC_VERSION" | cut -d. -f1-2 |
> >> > > + awk '{ if ($2 - 2.34 < 0) exit 1 }'
> >
> > This seems to work, though it's getting a bit verbose:
> >
> > awk '/^glibc / { split($2,v,"."); if (sprintf("%s.%s", v[1], v[2])
> > - 2.34 < 0) exit 1 }'
>
> If we are losing "cut" (which I think is a good thing to do), we
> probably can lose the pipe, too and refer to $_GLIBC_VERSION as an
> element in ARGV[] and make the command used as "if" condition to a
> single "awk" script?
Erm, something like this perhaps?
awk 'BEGIN { split(ARGV[1], v, "[ .]"); if (v[1]=="glibc" &&
sprintf("%s.%s", v[2], v[3]) - 2.34 < 0) exit 1 }'
> In general it is a good discipline to question a pipeline that
> preprocesses input fed to a script written in a language with full
> programming power like awk and perl (and to lessor extent, sed) to
> see if we can come up with a simpler solution without pipeline
> helping to solve what these languages are invented to solve, and I
> very much appreciate your exploration ;-)
Yup, although in this case, the pure-awk solution may not convey the
intent as easily as the original posted by Carlo which had the benefit
of being perhaps easier to digest.
