LFS commands, backslashed line continuations, and fileutils

NG WEY HAN meehoon at pd.jaring.my
Mon Apr 21 21:43:02 PDT 2003

Quoting Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>:

> On April 19, 2003 04:13 am, Kelledin wrote:
> Something else to think about: is it possible to tell bash to simply
> ignore 
> whitespace between a backslash and the end of line character?

That would be wrong.

> I think it's safe to say that the only reason somebody puts a backslash
> at the 
> end a line intends to continue it on the next line (if not, escape it),
> so if 
> Bash can be told to ingore the spurious white space provided the
> backslash 
> isn't escaped, then this problem should disappear. We could add to the

I'm sure we can think of other context where ignoring white space after a 
blackslash makes sense but that is not always true. It's very dangerous for 
bash to support this kind of behaviour.

I think there is no easy way to address the trailing space issue here but I 
might have a suggestion that might take some of the support effort off from 
this kind of problem.

At the end of chapter 5, add a check to see if all the package are indeed link 
statically. e.g.:

  for binaries in <some list of binaries>; do
    ldd $binaries 2>&1 > /dev/null
    if [[ $? == 0 ]]; then
      echo $binaries is not link statically!!

or something to that effect. At least that would indicate there is a problem 
with the compilation.

The best solution to this problem is to have a program or a script that is able 
to extract the command from the book and execute it but that would 
defeaters the purpose of building a LFS. :>

This e-mail has been sent via JARING webmail at http://www.jaring.my
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list