Messages in this thread | | | From | Alexander Kapshuk <> | Date | Sat, 3 Oct 2015 15:13:06 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ver_linux: module-init-tools.patch |
| |
On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Alexander Kapshuk > <alexander.kapshuk@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Alexander Kapshuk >> <alexander.kapshuk@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Jim Davis <jim.epost@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Alexander Kapshuk >>>>> >>>>>>>> +depmod=`whereis depmod | awk '{print $2}'` >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> I suspect it'll be hard to come up with something that's 100% >>>>> foolproof and respects user's choices. Sticking with searching the >>>>> user's $PATH at least won't lead to surprises about which program is >>>>> being run... >>>> >>>> Though looking back at your patch, what might work is to look first >>>> for depmod in the user's $PATH and then try whereis only if that >>>> fails. I'm not convinced that's much better than just searching >>>> $PATH, but that at least would go with the user's preference first. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jim >>> >>> Seems like the way to go. Thanks. >>> >>> I'll resubmit this and the other patches tomorrow with this >>> consideration in mind. >> >> What do you think of this? >> >> which depmod >/dev/null 2>&1 && depmod=depmod || >> depmod=`whereis depmod | awk '{print $2}'` >> >> test -n "$depmod" -a -x "$depmod" && >> $depmod -V 2>&1 | >> sed ' >> /[0-9]$/!d >> s/[^0-9\.]//g >> s/^/module-init-tools\t/ >> ' > > Looks good, thanks. > -- > Jim
Thanks to you too.
| |