On 03Aug2008 11:39, Skunk Worx <skunkworx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I've noticed if I try to install the JMF (Java Media Framework), > downloaded from Sun Micro, the script fails : > > $ sh ./jmf-2_1_1e-linux-i586.bin > $ Unpacking... > <snip> > tail: cannot open `+309' for reading: No such file or directory > Extracting... > ./install.sfx.5451: line 1: ==: No such file or directory > ./install.sfx.5451: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token `)' > <snip> > > ...and the script ends up zero-length. > > ...and if I restore the file, then change the tail command that is > trying to dump out the code section : > > $ sed -i 's/tail +309/tail -n +309/g' jmf-2_1_1e-linux-i586.bin > > ...it's ok. > > So, they use "tail +309" and Fedora 9 needs "tail -n +309". Google shows > people have seen this under Ubuntu as well. The latter syntax is POSIXly correct. Looks like they've got historic usage on Solaris in their script. Certainly historicaly the usage: tail -100 file for the _last_ 100 lines has been supported forever (though not required by POSIX, which made all command line options conform to the standard forms, hence the -n), and on Solaris it looks like a bare +number is supported just like the bare -number. But a quick check on a Gentoo box here does not support +number. A check on MacOSX _does_ support +number. So it looks like the GNU tools are a bit less helpful here, though still standard compliant. Sun _should_ be shipping their script with "tail -n +309", unless Solaris doesn't support that. It's quite possible that on Solaris /bin/tail does not accept -n, and another version (eg in /usr/xpg4/bin) would. But they must ship their script to work with the default /bin/tail on Solaris. And before you whinge about that being deficient, they may have left /bin/tail unchanged because that keeps their customers' scripting expectations stable. Plenty of vendors have to keep things stable for the "installed base". The same effect is why a RedHat Enterprise box runs "old" software, and backports security and bug fixes to the older code instead of upgrading to "current" - it keeps the platform stable, and for enterprise stuff that's important. Of course, the portable thing it to just move to saying: sed 1,308d instead of using "tail +number". Portable, stable. Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson <cs@xxxxxxxxxx> DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ WHAT"S A ""K3WL D00D"" AND WH3R3 CAN 1 G3T S0M3!!!!!!!!!!!???????? - Darren Embry -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
