From: | Paul Eggert <eggert(at)twinsun(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us |
Cc: | sauron(at)the-infinite(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts |
Date: | 2002-03-12 00:22:39 |
Message-ID: | 200203120022.g2C0Mdb08837@shade.twinsun.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
> From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 19:04:24 -0500 (EST)
>
> The patch basically takes:
>
> sort +1 -0 and changes it to
>
> and makes it:
>
> sort +1 -0 || sort -k 1,0
>
> or something like that.
Here is a bit more detail about what the patch does.
* It transforms `head -1 FOO' to `sed q FOO'.
This is portable to all hosts that I know of.
As it happens, `head -1' didn't work in Unix Version 7, but `sed q' did,
so this transformation improves portability to some ancient hosts too.
* It transforms `sort +0n -1' to `(sort -k 1,1n 2>/dev/null || sort +0n -1)',
and similarly for all other uses of `sort +FOO'. The basic idea is
to try POSIX standard syntax (standard since the first version of POSIX,
anyway, more than a dozen years ago), and to fall back on the traditional
Unix Version 7 syntax if the POSIX standard syntax is not supported.
The former transformation is perfectly safe. The latter
transformation is a bit tricky, since the first `sort' can fail for
reasons other than "I don't know what -k is", and in that case the
second `sort' will be invoked even though it should not be. I don't
think this will be a real problem in practice, but if you're worried
about it I could change the second transform to look like this:
if sort -k 1,1n /dev/null >/dev/null 2>&1
then sort -k 1,1n
else sort +0n -1
fi
I can submit a revised patch along those lines if you like.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-03-12 01:15:46 | Re: Adds the parsing of a CREATE SCHEMA statement |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-03-12 00:22:01 | Re: support for POSIX 1003.1-2001 hosts |