[new port] usage of shar command
sean at gothic.net.au
Wed Jul 21 13:32:05 UTC 2010
On 21/07/2010, at 10:56 PM, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
> On 21/07/2010 04:40, Joe wrote:
>> Doug Barton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, Peter Jeremy wrote:
>>>> The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous
>>>> (and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often
>>>> difficult to distinguish from quotes.
>>>> Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backticks)", IMO, it is
>>>> far easier to write $(find port_dir) - which is syntactically the
>>>> same but visually more obvious.
>>> That's a fair point. Do you think that the text as it currently exists
>>> is sufficiently clear, or do you think that it still needs the
>>> modification you're suggesting? I'm happy to make the change (or
>>> someone else can if they so desire) if that's what people thing is the
>>> right way to go.
>> The text as its currently exists is a long way from being clear to a
>> first timer. And I am talking about the new change that just went in.
>> "shar `find port_dir` (note the backticks)",
>> "shar $(find port_dir)"
> This one doesn't work in (t)csh, the backticks do.
>> both address the problem nicely.
>> By all means go and make the correction.
find port_dir -print0 | xargs -0 -x shar
Though it doesn't help when you've got too many files. Then you're probably better off with the tar command to generate shar files.
> A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-ports