Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 05:06:02 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@acm.org> To: Janne Snabb <snabb@epipe.com> Cc: Joe <joeb_722@comclark.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [new port] usage of shar command Message-ID: <20100720190602.GA32624@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1007190216290.9805@tiktik.epipe.com> References: <4C42CFDA.3040409@comclark.com> <4C42D292.208@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4C4388D2.30200@comclark.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1007190216290.9805@tiktik.epipe.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--J2SCkAp4GZ/dPZZf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2010-Jul-19 02:19:33 +0000, Janne Snabb <snabb@epipe.com> wrote: >On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Joe wrote: > >> This needs to be in the handbook. How is anybody going to know that the >> `find port_dir` is suppose to be enclosed by [`backticks`]. I has to be = said=20 >> in words not just a printed example. > >I would have assumed that anyone who submits a port would be familiar >with the elementary basics of shell syntax. The major problems with backticks is that they tend to be inconspicuous (and easily confused with bits of dust or fly-droppings) and are often difficult to distinguish from quotes. Rather than write "`find port_dir` (note the backticks)", IMO, it is far easier to write $(find port_dir) - which is syntactically the same but visually more obvious. --=20 Peter Jeremy --J2SCkAp4GZ/dPZZf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkxF85oACgkQ/opHv/APuIc6zACdHk8CZppm3k18+wKLHfr8OcSB CaAAnirMa56MUjEWzNElzQg+YIxWZwBO =2Khw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J2SCkAp4GZ/dPZZf--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100720190602.GA32624>