Re: awk -- Can't win for loosing

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 5:30 PM

> Folks,
> 
>   I'm prepared to include the sources and build awk as part
> of the danged apache build if we can't find a solution to these
> issues.  I propose we add helpers/awk and drop in the AT&T/Lucient
> licensed code as-is, build it as part of the makefile.win build
> before we rewrite files.
> 
>   It is an absolute joke that some windows shells aren't accepting
> slashes (quoted, mind you) in file names, while it's an equal joke
> that gnu awk won't accept backslashed names.
> 
>   I have no other good answer.  Ideas?  Back to perl scripts?

The damage is done, we've reverted to the working mechanism for
the one true awk, and now diss the gnu awk.  Questions now for
gnu awk users...

I'm suspecting that awk is ignorning the -f foo flag and solo
BEGIN block?  Though that's supposed to tell awk that no files
are expected, I'm guessing gnu awk is broken in this respect.

Please download, with the properly quoted arguments, and let
me know what you see.

Re: awk -- Can't win for loosing

[jlwpc1 <jl...@mail.earthlink.net>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
To: <ne...@apache.org>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: awk -- Can't win for loosing


> From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 5:30 PM
> 
> > Folks,
> > 
> >   I'm prepared to include the sources and build awk as part
> > of the danged apache build if we can't find a solution to these
> > issues.  I propose we add helpers/awk and drop in the AT&T/Lucient
> > licensed code as-is, build it as part of the makefile.win build
> > before we rewrite files.
> > 
> >   It is an absolute joke that some windows shells aren't accepting
> > slashes (quoted, mind you) in file names, while it's an equal joke
> > that gnu awk won't accept backslashed names.
> > 
> >   I have no other good answer.  Ideas?  Back to perl scripts?
> 
> The damage is done, we've reverted to the working mechanism for
> the one true awk, and now diss the gnu awk.  Questions now for
> gnu awk users...
> 
> I'm suspecting that awk is ignorning the -f foo flag and solo
> BEGIN block?  Though that's supposed to tell awk that no files
> are expected, I'm guessing gnu awk is broken in this respect.
> 
> Please download, with the properly quoted arguments, and let
> me know what you see.
> 
> 
> 


LOL :)

I told Apache "developers" this would bite them!  

For those that wish to do the make files awk "actions" and do this "cleanly",
(by learning the Windows OS and the Windows OS tools),
so you can "develop", then go to the following:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/scripting/

Then throw awk away and CScript.exe it - available on ALL Windows OSes,
(except for the Apache "developers" computers)!  :)

JLW