Re: sc_tight_scope on cygwin

[Jim Meyering]

Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Jim Meyering on 3/26/2009 7:32 AM:
>>> failing on sc_strftime_check, with "info: No menu item `date' in node
>>> `(libc.info.gz)Top'").
>>
>> For me, that rule's "info libc date calendar format" command
>> prints the "21.4.5 Formatting Calendar Time" section.
>> Not for you, I suppose?
>
> Nope.  Cygwin doesn't use glibc, so 'info libc' fails to turn up anything
> at all.  Do you have a preferred way to skip this test on non-Linux
> platforms, since glibc's info manual is unlikely to appear on any other
> system?

If the test is skipped, it'd be nice to emit a warning,
so that if it happens to me because I forgot to install
glibc's documentation on a Linux system, I'll notice it.

>> The above doesn't work at all for me.
>> Using ? in a sed regexp is not portable:
>>
>>     $ echo _a |sed 's/_?/x/'
>>     _a
>>     $ echo _a |sed 's/_\?/x/'
>>     xa
>>
>> This sort of change should have the same effect, but more portably:
>>
>>      nm -e *.$(OBJEXT)                                               \
>>          | sed -n 's/.* T //p'                                       \
>> +        | sed 's/^_//'                                              \
>
> Indeed, this approach worked for me.  Is it worth trying to combine the
> two sed invocations into one, or should I just go ahead and commit with
> this style?

This style is fine by me.

Thanks.