You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@karaf.apache.org by Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com> on 2011/11/30 05:21:15 UTC
Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf
-> karaf.sh
Hey guys,
I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH I'm
personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do it
now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
So, WDYT?
Kind regards,
Andreas
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf ->
karaf.sh
To: issues@karaf.apache.org
use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
--------------------------------------------
Key: KARAF-1060
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
Project: Karaf
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
karaf.bat
but unix, do not:
karaf
I suggest to use, instead:
karaf.sh
so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
:-)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
Not a big deal, but I agree that ".sh" doesn't look as nice, and have
the additional concern that using karaf.sh might give the impression
that the Karaf team doesn't realize that the ".sh" is unneeded in order
to run *nix shell scripts. And when you give the impression to users
that you are uneducated on a rather simple matter, they might worry
where else within Karaf that lack of education will surface. :)
Andrei's use case, so he can click on the Karaf file directly using a
third-party Eclipse plugin instead of right-clicking on the file and
choosing "Open With-->{third-party Eclipse plugin}" is not significant
enough IMO to merit this change. (If the 3rd party plugin does not
offer that right-click option, the bug report should go to the plugin,
not Karaf.) If he is really editing the file that often, he can rename
it with that extension locally on his machine, the "karaf" script gets
renamed all the time through branding.
Glen
On 11/29/2011 11:25 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi Andres,
>
> My comments:
>
> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
> Windows
> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script
> more than the extension.
> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
> us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
> than /bin/bash
>
> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
> for me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list:
>> TBH I'm
>> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should
>> do it
>> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till
>> 4.0).
>>
>> So, WDYT?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
>> karaf ->
>> karaf.sh
>> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>>
>>
>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>> --------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: KARAF-1060
>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>> Project: Karaf
>> Issue Type: Bug
>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>>
>>
>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>> karaf.bat
>>
>> but unix, do not:
>> karaf
>>
>> I suggest to use, instead:
>> karaf.sh
>>
>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>>
>> :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>> administrators:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
>> For more information on JIRA, see:
>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>
>
--
Glen Mazza
Talend Community Coders
http://coders.talend.com
blog: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 4:17:46 PM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Well, I'd object tomcat does the same, and afaik, I've never heard it
> was a problem.
>
> I think not having the suffix ".sh" is fine when you only have unix
> binaries. If you mix both in the same distribution, having different
> extensions makes things more intuitive / homogeneous imho
As a counter example, we all type "mvn", not "mvn.sh" yet there is a mvn.bat
in there as well. :-)
Dan
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do
> > it. A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a
> > perl script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh
> > really does.
> >
> > I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables"
> > in
> > there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
> >
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> >> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> >> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
> >> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
> >> scripts.
> >> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> >> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
> >>
> >> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> >> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> >> that it's not a requirement).
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
wrote:
> >> > Hi Andres,
> >> >
> >> > My comments:
> >> >
> >> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement
> >> > on
> >> > Windows
> >> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix
> >> > script more than the extension.
> >> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which
> >> > allow
> >> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX)
> >> > more
> >> > than /bin/bash
> >> >
> >> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very
> >> > good
> >> > for me.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > JB
> >> >
> >> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> >> >> Hey guys,
> >> >>
> >> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev
> >> >> list: TBH I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to
> >> >> change this we should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont
> >> >> happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
> >> >>
> >> >> So, WDYT?
> >> >>
> >> >> Kind regards,
> >> >> Andreas
> >> >>
> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> >> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> >> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file
> >> >> extenstions:
> >> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>
> >> >> Key: KARAF-1060
> >> >> URL:
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> >> >> Project: Karaf
> >> >> Issue Type: Bug
> >> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> >> >> karaf.bat
> >> >>
> >> >> but unix, do not:
> >> >> karaf
> >> >>
> >> >> I suggest to use, instead:
> >> >> karaf.sh
> >> >>
> >> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> >> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
> >> >>
> >> >> :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> >> >> administrators:
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!defa
> >> >> ult.js pa
> >> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
> >> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> > jbonofre@apache.org
> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
cygwin doesn't but it helps associating it in windows for beeing executable
with a cygwin bash from the file-explorer :)
2011/11/30 Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>
> Why does cygwin require a ".sh" extension ?
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:21, Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> > another thing here, with the .sh files you also are able to run it with
> > cygwin tools for windows. :)
> > For all those poor guys having to use windows and still want to be able
> to
> > use the powerfull shell :)
> >
> > 2011/11/30 Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> Well, I'd object tomcat does the same, and afaik, I've never heard it
> >> was a problem.
> >>
> >> I think not having the suffix ".sh" is fine when you only have unix
> >> binaries. If you mix both in the same distribution, having different
> >> extensions makes things more intuitive / homogeneous imho
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to
> do
> >> it.
> >> > A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a
> perl
> >> > script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really
> does.
> >> >
> >> > I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758
> "executables" in
> >> > there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Dan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >> >> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> >> >> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> >> >> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a
> bit
> >> >> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for
> unix
> >> >> scripts.
> >> >> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> >> >> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
> >> >>
> >> >> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> >> >> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> >> >> that it's not a requirement).
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb@nanthrax.net
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Andres,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > My comments:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement
> on
> >> >> > Windows
> >> >> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script
> >> more
> >> >> > than the extension.
> >> >> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which
> allow
> >> >> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
> >> >> > than /bin/bash
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very
> good
> >> >> > for me.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Regards
> >> >> > JB
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> >> >> >> Hey guys,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list:
> >> TBH
> >> >> >> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
> >> >> >> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a
> long
> >> >> >> time (till 4.0).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So, WDYT?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Kind regards,
> >> >> >> Andreas
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> >> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> >> >> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> >> >> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
> >> >> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Key: KARAF-1060
> >> >> >> URL:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> >> >> >> Project: Karaf
> >> >> >> Issue Type: Bug
> >> >> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> >> >> >> karaf.bat
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> but unix, do not:
> >> >> >> karaf
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I suggest to use, instead:
> >> >> >> karaf.sh
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> >> >> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> :-)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> >> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> >> >> >> administrators:
> >> >> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
> >> >> >> pa
> >> >> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
> >> >> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> >> > jbonofre@apache.org
> >> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >> > --
> >> > Daniel Kulp
> >> > dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> >> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ------------------------
> >> Guillaume Nodet
> >> ------------------------
> >> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> >> ------------------------
> >> Open Source SOA
> >> http://fusesource.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> > OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer
> &
> > Project Lead
> > blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
--
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Ioannis Canellos <io...@gmail.com>.
I would assume that it only needs it for associating sh extention with
cygwin. But I can't know for sure, I haven't used a directx container for a
while :-P
--
*Ioannis Canellos*
*
FuseSource <http://fusesource.com>
**
Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
**
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
Apache Camel <http://camel.apache.org/> Committer
Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer
Apache Gora <http://incubator.apache.org/gora/> Committer
Apache DirectMemory <http://incubator.apache.org/directmemory/> Committer
*
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Why does cygwin require a ".sh" extension ?
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:21, Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> another thing here, with the .sh files you also are able to run it with
> cygwin tools for windows. :)
> For all those poor guys having to use windows and still want to be able to
> use the powerfull shell :)
>
> 2011/11/30 Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>
>
>> Well, I'd object tomcat does the same, and afaik, I've never heard it
>> was a problem.
>>
>> I think not having the suffix ".sh" is fine when you only have unix
>> binaries. If you mix both in the same distribution, having different
>> extensions makes things more intuitive / homogeneous imho
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do
>> it.
>> > A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl
>> > script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does.
>> >
>> > I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in
>> > there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
>> >
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> >> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
>> >> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
>> >> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
>> >> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
>> >> scripts.
>> >> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
>> >> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>> >>
>> >> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
>> >> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
>> >> that it's not a requirement).
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Andres,
>> >> >
>> >> > My comments:
>> >> >
>> >> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
>> >> > Windows
>> >> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script
>> more
>> >> > than the extension.
>> >> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
>> >> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
>> >> > than /bin/bash
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
>> >> > for me.
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards
>> >> > JB
>> >> >
>> >> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>> >> >> Hey guys,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list:
>> TBH
>> >> >> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
>> >> >> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long
>> >> >> time (till 4.0).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So, WDYT?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Kind regards,
>> >> >> Andreas
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>> >> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>> >> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
>> >> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
>> >> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>> >> >> --------------------------------------------
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Key: KARAF-1060
>> >> >> URL:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>> >> >> Project: Karaf
>> >> >> Issue Type: Bug
>> >> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>> >> >> karaf.bat
>> >> >>
>> >> >> but unix, do not:
>> >> >> karaf
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I suggest to use, instead:
>> >> >> karaf.sh
>> >> >>
>> >> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>> >> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> :-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> >> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>> >> >> administrators:
>> >> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
>> >> >> pa
>> >> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
>> >> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
>> >> > --
>> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> >> > jbonofre@apache.org
>> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
>> > --
>> > Daniel Kulp
>> > dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
>> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ------------------------
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
> Project Lead
> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>
--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
another thing here, with the .sh files you also are able to run it with
cygwin tools for windows. :)
For all those poor guys having to use windows and still want to be able to
use the powerfull shell :)
2011/11/30 Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>
> Well, I'd object tomcat does the same, and afaik, I've never heard it
> was a problem.
>
> I think not having the suffix ".sh" is fine when you only have unix
> binaries. If you mix both in the same distribution, having different
> extensions makes things more intuitive / homogeneous imho
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do
> it.
> > A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl
> > script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does.
> >
> > I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in
> > there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
> >
> >
> > Dan
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> >> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> >> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> >> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
> >> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
> >> scripts.
> >> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> >> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
> >>
> >> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> >> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> >> that it's not a requirement).
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi Andres,
> >> >
> >> > My comments:
> >> >
> >> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
> >> > Windows
> >> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script
> more
> >> > than the extension.
> >> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
> >> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
> >> > than /bin/bash
> >> >
> >> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
> >> > for me.
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > JB
> >> >
> >> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> >> >> Hey guys,
> >> >>
> >> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list:
> TBH
> >> >> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
> >> >> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long
> >> >> time (till 4.0).
> >> >>
> >> >> So, WDYT?
> >> >>
> >> >> Kind regards,
> >> >> Andreas
> >> >>
> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> >> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> >> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
> >> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> >> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>
> >> >> Key: KARAF-1060
> >> >> URL:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> >> >> Project: Karaf
> >> >> Issue Type: Bug
> >> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> >> >> karaf.bat
> >> >>
> >> >> but unix, do not:
> >> >> karaf
> >> >>
> >> >> I suggest to use, instead:
> >> >> karaf.sh
> >> >>
> >> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> >> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
> >> >>
> >> >> :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> >> >> administrators:
> >> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
> >> >> pa
> >> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
> >> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
> >> > --
> >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> >> > jbonofre@apache.org
> >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> > --
> > Daniel Kulp
> > dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
--
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Well, I'd object tomcat does the same, and afaik, I've never heard it
was a problem.
I think not having the suffix ".sh" is fine when you only have unix
binaries. If you mix both in the same distribution, having different
extensions makes things more intuitive / homogeneous imho
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 16:07, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do it.
> A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl
> script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does.
>
> I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in
> there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
>
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
>> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
>> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
>> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
>> scripts.
>> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
>> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>>
>> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
>> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
>> that it's not a requirement).
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>> > Hi Andres,
>> >
>> > My comments:
>> >
>> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
>> > Windows
>> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
>> > than the extension.
>> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
>> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
>> > than /bin/bash
>> >
>> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
>> > for me.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > JB
>> >
>> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>> >> Hey guys,
>> >>
>> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH
>> >> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
>> >> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long
>> >> time (till 4.0).
>> >>
>> >> So, WDYT?
>> >>
>> >> Kind regards,
>> >> Andreas
>> >>
>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
>> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
>> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>> >> --------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Key: KARAF-1060
>> >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>> >> Project: Karaf
>> >> Issue Type: Bug
>> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>> >> karaf.bat
>> >>
>> >> but unix, do not:
>> >> karaf
>> >>
>> >> I suggest to use, instead:
>> >> karaf.sh
>> >>
>> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>> >>
>> >> :-)
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>> >> administrators:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
>> >> pa
>> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
>> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
>> > --
>> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> > jbonofre@apache.org
>> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>
--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
FWIW I like it the way it is, I'm very used to unix scripts not having a .sh, I'd vote -1 also.
thanks
david jencks
On Nov 30, 2011, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do it.
> A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl
> script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does.
>
> I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in
> there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
>
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
>> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
>> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
>> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
>> scripts.
>> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
>> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>>
>> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
>> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
>> that it's not a requirement).
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>> Hi Andres,
>>>
>>> My comments:
>>>
>>> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
>>> Windows
>>> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
>>> than the extension.
>>> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
>>> us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
>>> than /bin/bash
>>>
>>> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
>>> for me.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH
>>>> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
>>>> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long
>>>> time (till 4.0).
>>>>
>>>> So, WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>>>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>>>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
>>>> karaf -> karaf.sh
>>>> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Key: KARAF-1060
>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>>>> Project: Karaf
>>>> Issue Type: Bug
>>>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>>>> karaf.bat
>>>>
>>>> but unix, do not:
>>>> karaf
>>>>
>>>> I suggest to use, instead:
>>>> karaf.sh
>>>>
>>>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>>>> administrators:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
>>>> pa
>>>> For more information on JIRA, see:
>>>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do it.
A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl
script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does.
I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in
there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension.
Dan
On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
> scripts.
> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>
> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> that it's not a requirement).
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> > Hi Andres,
> >
> > My comments:
> >
> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
> > Windows
> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
> > than the extension.
> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
> > us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more
> > than /bin/bash
> >
> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
> > for me.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> >> Hey guys,
> >>
> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH
> >> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we
> >> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long
> >> time (till 4.0).
> >>
> >> So, WDYT?
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Andreas
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
> >> karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> --------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Key: KARAF-1060
> >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> >> Project: Karaf
> >> Issue Type: Bug
> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
> >>
> >>
> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> >> karaf.bat
> >>
> >> but unix, do not:
> >> karaf
> >>
> >> I suggest to use, instead:
> >> karaf.sh
> >>
> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
> >>
> >> :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> >> administrators:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js
> >> pa
> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
> >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira>
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbonofre@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Ioannis Canellos <io...@gmail.com>.
+1 for adding the sh extension.
--
*Ioannis Canellos*
*
FuseSource <http://fusesource.com>
**
Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
**
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
Apache Camel <http://camel.apache.org/> Committer
Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer
Apache Gora <http://incubator.apache.org/gora/> Committer
Apache DirectMemory <http://incubator.apache.org/directmemory/> Committer
*
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Well, maybe this was just a side effect of changing the way the
distribution is built, I don't recall any discussion around that, but
I may have missed something.
I'm not sure it's really easy to revert that change, so maybe renaming
the scripts would be easier.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 09:13, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi Guillaume,
>
> If we agree that we have a single distribution (which I don't like as a pure
> Unix people ;)), I have no problem to rename it.
>
> We just have to update dependant scripts (in admin, start, stop, etc).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 11/30/2011 08:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>
>> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
>> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
>> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
>> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
>> scripts.
>> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
>> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>>
>> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
>> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
>> that it's not a requirement).
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Andres,
>>>
>>> My comments:
>>>
>>> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
>>> Windows
>>> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
>>> than the extension.
>>> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow us
>>> to
>>> use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more than
>>> /bin/bash
>>>
>>> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
>>> for
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey guys,
>>>>
>>>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH
>>>> I'm
>>>> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do
>>>> it
>>>> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till
>>>> 4.0).
>>>>
>>>> So, WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>>>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>>>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf
>>>> ->
>>>> karaf.sh
>>>> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Key: KARAF-1060
>>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>>>> Project: Karaf
>>>> Issue Type: Bug
>>>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>>>> karaf.bat
>>>>
>>>> but unix, do not:
>>>> karaf
>>>>
>>>> I suggest to use, instead:
>>>> karaf.sh
>>>>
>>>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>>>> administrators:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
>>>> For more information on JIRA, see:
>>>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Guillaume,
If we agree that we have a single distribution (which I don't like as a
pure Unix people ;)), I have no problem to rename it.
We just have to update dependant scripts (in admin, start, stop, etc).
Regards
JB
On 11/30/2011 08:20 AM, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
> scripts.
> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>
> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> that it's not a requirement).
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>> Hi Andres,
>>
>> My comments:
>>
>> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
>> Windows
>> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
>> than the extension.
>> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow us to
>> use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more than /bin/bash
>>
>> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good for
>> me.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey guys,
>>>
>>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH I'm
>>> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do it
>>> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
>>>
>>> So, WDYT?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf ->
>>> karaf.sh
>>> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Key: KARAF-1060
>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>>> Project: Karaf
>>> Issue Type: Bug
>>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>>>
>>>
>>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>>> karaf.bat
>>>
>>> but unix, do not:
>>> karaf
>>>
>>> I suggest to use, instead:
>>> karaf.sh
>>>
>>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>>> administrators:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
>>> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Achim Nierbeck <bc...@googlemail.com>.
Hi
I second Guillaume here, even that a .sh isn't really required I think it's
a
"good practice" for all those windows users out there ;)
to not get confused and might be interested in running it with cygwin :)
Regards, Achim
2011/11/30 Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>
> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
> scripts.
> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
>
> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
> that it's not a requirement).
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
> > Hi Andres,
> >
> > My comments:
> >
> > 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
> > Windows
> > 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
> > than the extension.
> > 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
> us to
> > use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more than
> /bin/bash
> >
> > I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
> for
> > me.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey guys,
> >>
> >> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH
> I'm
> >> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do
> it
> >> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till
> 4.0).
> >>
> >> So, WDYT?
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >> Andreas
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> >> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> >> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf
> ->
> >> karaf.sh
> >> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> >> --------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Key: KARAF-1060
> >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> >> Project: Karaf
> >> Issue Type: Bug
> >> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
> >>
> >>
> >> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> >> karaf.bat
> >>
> >> but unix, do not:
> >> karaf
> >>
> >> I suggest to use, instead:
> >> karaf.sh
> >>
> >> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
> >>
> >> :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> >> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> >> administrators:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
> >> For more information on JIRA, see:
> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbonofre@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>
--
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows
files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now
have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit
more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix
scripts.
So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a
big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not ....
Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart
from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree
that it's not a requirement).
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi Andres,
>
> My comments:
>
> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
> Windows
> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
> than the extension.
> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow us to
> use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more than /bin/bash
>
> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good for
> me.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
>>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH I'm
>> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do it
>> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
>>
>> So, WDYT?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf ->
>> karaf.sh
>> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>>
>>
>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
>> --------------------------------------------
>>
>> Key: KARAF-1060
>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
>> Project: Karaf
>> Issue Type: Bug
>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>>
>>
>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
>> karaf.bat
>>
>> but unix, do not:
>> karaf
>>
>> I suggest to use, instead:
>> karaf.sh
>>
>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>>
>> :-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
>> administrators:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
>> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
--
------------------------
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com
Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions:
karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Andres,
My comments:
1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on
Windows
2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more
than the extension.
3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow
us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more than
/bin/bash
I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good
for me.
Regards
JB
On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH I'm
> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do it
> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
>
> So, WDYT?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<ji...@apache.org>
> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf ->
> karaf.sh
> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>
>
> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KARAF-1060
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> Project: Karaf
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>
>
> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> karaf.bat
>
> but unix, do not:
> karaf
>
> I suggest to use, instead:
> karaf.sh
>
> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>
> :-)
>
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> administrators:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
Posted by Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>.
I personally think that is a bad reasoning, there shouldn't be too many times
that editor support really is that necessary….. But… :)
As far as we are concerned it is an executable file i.e mod 755
for the distribution.
/je
On Nov 29, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Andreas Pieber wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH I'm
> personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we should do it
> now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long time (till 4.0).
>
> So, WDYT?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA) <ji...@apache.org>
> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45
> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: karaf ->
> karaf.sh
> To: issues@karaf.apache.org
>
>
> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KARAF-1060
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060
> Project: Karaf
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin
>
>
> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as
> karaf.bat
>
> but unix, do not:
> karaf
>
> I suggest to use, instead:
> karaf.sh
>
> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/
>
> :-)
>
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> administrators:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira