Rename JTstuff

[judovana]

No description provided.

[zzambers]

I am not sure, if we want to run readlink at all, in case it does not support -f. In that case, it fails if argument is not symlink (i.e. if javac is not symlink). Even when javac is a symlink, usefulness is somewhat questionable, e.g.:

readlink /usr/bin/javac
/etc/alternatives/javac

[judovana]

I am not sure, if we want to run readlink at all, in case it does not support -f. In that case, it fails if argument is not symlink (i.e. if javac is not symlink). Even when javac is a symlink, usefulness is somewhat questionable, e.g.:

readlink /usr/bin/javac
/etc/alternatives/javac

Yah, I know that. But still better then fail. What troubles me more, is the second usage

if [ ! `readlink $READLINK_F ${SCRIPT_DIR}` == `pwd`  ] ; then

where

readlink "."
echo $?
1
 readlink ".."
echo $?
1
 echo $PWD/..
/home/jvanek/..

So it is making the condition unusable. But still better then fail I think

Maybe resolve CWD as

CryptoTest/run.sh

Lines 11 to 18 in 5064ea3

	SCRIPT_SOURCE="${BASH_SOURCE[0]}"
	while [ -h "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" ]; do # resolve $SOURCE until the file is no longer a symlink
	SCRIPT_DIR="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" )" && pwd )"
	SCRIPT_SOURCE="$(readlink "$SCRIPT_SOURCE")"
	# if $SOURCE was a relative symlink, we need to resolve it relative to the path where the symlink file was located
	[[ $SCRIPT_SOURCE != /* ]] && SCRIPT_SOURCE="$SCRIPT_DIR/$SCRIPT_SOURCE"
	done
	readonly SCRIPT_DIR="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" )" && pwd )"

?

[zzambers]

Well, if argument is not symlink, it will fail. :)

[zzambers]

Actually I was also looking at begining of the script, with some effort you could put it in a function and reuse it...

[judovana]

Actually I was also looking at begining of the script, with some effort you could put it in a function and reuse it...

yy!

[zzambers]

Btw, is then second usage even necessary? As SCRIPT_DIR should already be canonized by that very code on the beginning.

[judovana]

Btw, is then second usage even necessary? As SCRIPT_DIR should already be canonized by that very code on the beginning.

In theory no. I think I added it as safe belt, to prevent nasty surprises

[judovana]

Actually I was also looking at begining of the script, with some effort you could put it in a function and reuse it...

function readlink-f() {
  local SOURCE="${1}"
  if [ -f "${SOURCE}" ] ; then
    local NAME="/$(basename "${SOURCE}")"
  else
    local SOURCE="$SOURCE/blah"
    local NAME=""
  fi
  while [ -h "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" ]; do # resolve $SOURCE until the file is no longer a symlink
    local DIR="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" )" && pwd )"
    local SOURCE="$(readlink "$SOURCE")"
    # if $SOURCE was a relative symlink, we need to resolve it relative to the path where the symlink file was located
    [[ $SOURCE != /* ]] && SOURCE="$DIR/$SOURCE"
  done
  local RESULT="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SOURCE" )" && pwd )"
  echo "${RESULT}${NAME}"
}
}

Wookrs fine for all except symlinked file, which is natureal due to dirname usage.. Morning would be better then evening. Thanx and see you tomorrow!

[judovana]

Actually I was also looking at begining of the script, with some effort you could put it in a function and reuse it...

function readlink-f() {
  local SOURCE="${1}"
  if [ -f "${SOURCE}" ] ; then
    local NAME="/$(basename "${SOURCE}")"
  else
    local SOURCE="$SOURCE/blah"
    local NAME=""
  fi
  while [ -h "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" ]; do # resolve $SOURCE until the file is no longer a symlink
    local DIR="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SCRIPT_SOURCE" )" && pwd )"
    local SOURCE="$(readlink "$SOURCE")"
    # if $SOURCE was a relative symlink, we need to resolve it relative to the path where the symlink file was located
    [[ $SOURCE != /* ]] && SOURCE="$DIR/$SOURCE"
  done
  local RESULT="$( cd -P "$( dirname "$SOURCE" )" && pwd )"
  echo "${RESULT}${NAME}"
}
}

Wookrs fine for all except symlinked file, which is natureal due to dirname usage.. Morning would be better then evening. Thanx and see you tomorrow!

No I dont like that :D I will rather drop the usage in java/javac