Quoting Vasudev Kamath (2014-12-29 17:44:54) > Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> writes: >> But (judging only from above comments) there might be another issue >> with that loop not handling errors correctly. Perhaps as simple as a >> "set -e" (although I seem to recall that maintainer scripts shouldn't >> blindly do that). > > Yes, there should be probably a declaration > > SHELL := sh -e > > which would error out when anything in shell command goes wrong. But I > think its better to target this post Jessie. I recommend to not unconditonally instruct make to fail any and all shell invocations, but care for error handling separately for each call. E.g. when using pipes, failures may be hidden, which I fear has a higher risk of being missed if not every single shell call is inspected for error handling. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature