You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> on 2005/11/03 14:01:26 UTC
Please check ksh scripts in bin distribution
This is NOT the official release candidate but I would appreciate if
Knut or someone with access to a unix system could check out the ksh
scripts to see if the recent svn setting changes had the desired
effect. I performed the release target on Windows which folks felt was
ok, but this needs verification.
http://people.apache.org/~kmarsden/derby10.1.2.1.330390
FYI: Running derbyall on this build, the strange wisconsin query plan
change seems to have reappeared, plus we have the failure in
lang/dcl.sql so I will have to reroll after these issues are resolved,
but would like verification that the unix script issue has been resolved
to everyone's satisfaction. Deepa mentioned that the ksh scripts don't
work with mks. I think this is expected, but want to check on that too.
Thanks
Kathey
Re: 10.1.2.1 release
Posted by Knut Anders Hatlen <Kn...@Sun.COM>.
Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Nov 3, 2005, at 7:48 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
>
>> The ksh scripts work fine on Solaris (tested tar and zip).
>
> Great. (sort of :-) )
>
>> I have found another issue with them, tough. When you just put the
>> script directory in your path and type 'ij.ksh', most unices will use
>> /bin/sh instead of ksh. Under Linux and Cygwin this is fine because
>> /bin/sh actually is Bash, which supports all the ksh commands used in
>> the scripts. Under Solaris and BSD /bin/sh is not Bash, and therefore
>> the scripts fail.
>
> Wouldn't a #! be sufficient? I guess you never know for sure...
The problem with #! for ksh scripts is that ksh might be installed in
different paths on different platforms. On Solaris it would be
/bin/ksh, on FreeBSD /usr/local/bin/ksh, on NetBSD /usr/pkg/bin/ksh,
on Debian /bin/pdksh. #!/bin/sh is portable, I think, but it's not ksh
(if that's a problem).
>> I'll file a JIRA issue on this and attach a patch.
>>
>> Sorry I didn't bring it up earlier. (The thing is, I have never
>> actually used the scripts.)
>
> Can we agree that this is not a showstopper for 10.1.2.1, considering
> that this was an issue for 10.1.1.0?
Yes, it is absolutely not a showstopper.
> I agree that it would be nice to
> fix so that it works 'out-of-the-box' for everyone, but at some point
> you need to make a cutoff for fixes, no matter how small. Personally,
> I think that this is something that can wait for 10.1.3 and/or 10.2,
> and there are other suggestions completely besides scripts (see
> Lance's mail about using Ant).
>
> If there are no objections, I think we should target DERBY-667 and
> DERBY-677 for 10.1.3.0/10.2.0.0 and continue forward with releasing
> 10.1.2.1.
Agreed.
--
Knut Anders
Re: 10.1.2.1 release (was Re: Please check ksh scripts...)
Posted by "Lance J. Andersen" <La...@Sun.COM>.
I do not see this as a requirement for 10.1.2.1. I do think we want to
explore migrating these scripts IMHO.
-lance
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
>
> On Nov 3, 2005, at 7:48 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
>
>> The ksh scripts work fine on Solaris (tested tar and zip).
>
>
> Great. (sort of :-) )
>
>> I have found another issue with them, tough. When you just put the
>> script directory in your path and type 'ij.ksh', most unices will use
>> /bin/sh instead of ksh. Under Linux and Cygwin this is fine because
>> /bin/sh actually is Bash, which supports all the ksh commands used in
>> the scripts. Under Solaris and BSD /bin/sh is not Bash, and therefore
>> the scripts fail.
>
>
> Wouldn't a #! be sufficient? I guess you never know for sure...
>
>> I'll file a JIRA issue on this and attach a patch.
>>
>> Sorry I didn't bring it up earlier. (The thing is, I have never
>> actually used the scripts.)
>
>
> Can we agree that this is not a showstopper for 10.1.2.1, considering
> that this was an issue for 10.1.1.0? I agree that it would be nice to
> fix so that it works 'out-of-the-box' for everyone, but at some point
> you need to make a cutoff for fixes, no matter how small. Personally,
> I think that this is something that can wait for 10.1.3 and/or 10.2,
> and there are other suggestions completely besides scripts (see
> Lance's mail about using Ant).
>
> If there are no objections, I think we should target DERBY-667 and
> DERBY-677 for 10.1.3.0/10.2.0.0 and continue forward with releasing
> 10.1.2.1.
>
> andrew
>
10.1.2.1 release (was Re: Please check ksh scripts...)
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On Nov 3, 2005, at 7:48 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
> The ksh scripts work fine on Solaris (tested tar and zip).
Great. (sort of :-) )
> I have found another issue with them, tough. When you just put the
> script directory in your path and type 'ij.ksh', most unices will use
> /bin/sh instead of ksh. Under Linux and Cygwin this is fine because
> /bin/sh actually is Bash, which supports all the ksh commands used in
> the scripts. Under Solaris and BSD /bin/sh is not Bash, and therefore
> the scripts fail.
Wouldn't a #! be sufficient? I guess you never know for sure...
> I'll file a JIRA issue on this and attach a patch.
>
> Sorry I didn't bring it up earlier. (The thing is, I have never
> actually used the scripts.)
Can we agree that this is not a showstopper for 10.1.2.1, considering
that this was an issue for 10.1.1.0? I agree that it would be nice to
fix so that it works 'out-of-the-box' for everyone, but at some point
you need to make a cutoff for fixes, no matter how small. Personally,
I think that this is something that can wait for 10.1.3 and/or 10.2,
and there are other suggestions completely besides scripts (see
Lance's mail about using Ant).
If there are no objections, I think we should target DERBY-667 and
DERBY-677 for 10.1.3.0/10.2.0.0 and continue forward with releasing
10.1.2.1.
andrew
Re: Please check ksh scripts in bin distribution
Posted by Knut Anders Hatlen <Kn...@Sun.COM>.
Kathey Marsden <km...@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> This is NOT the official release candidate but I would appreciate if
> Knut or someone with access to a unix system could check out the ksh
> scripts to see if the recent svn setting changes had the desired
> effect.
The ksh scripts work fine on Solaris (tested tar and zip).
I have found another issue with them, tough. When you just put the
script directory in your path and type 'ij.ksh', most unices will use
/bin/sh instead of ksh. Under Linux and Cygwin this is fine because
/bin/sh actually is Bash, which supports all the ksh commands used in
the scripts. Under Solaris and BSD /bin/sh is not Bash, and therefore
the scripts fail.
The fix is really simple. All you have to do, is to change the setting
of environment variables from
export VAR=value
to
VAR=value
export VAR
I'll file a JIRA issue on this and attach a patch.
Sorry I didn't bring it up earlier. (The thing is, I have never
actually used the scripts.)
--
Knut Anders