From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-7993-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 3587 invoked from network); 22 Sep 1999 08:58:54 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 22 Sep 1999 08:58:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 13637 invoked by alias); 22 Sep 1999 08:58:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 7993
Received: (qmail 13630 invoked from network); 22 Sep 1999 08:58:37 -0000
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 01:58:31 -0700
From: Clint Olsen <olsenc@ichips.intel.com>
To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk
Subject: Re: #!/path/to/arch-indep/zsh -f
Message-ID: <19990922015831.A82900@ichips.intel.com>
References: <19990921182350.A45626@ichips.intel.com> <9909220759.AA12437@ibmth.df.unipi.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre1i
In-Reply-To: <9909220759.AA12437@ibmth.df.unipi.it>
Organization: Intel Corporation, Hillsboro, OR
X-Disclaimer: Mutt Bites!

On Sep 22, Peter Stephenson wrote:
>
> Well, a more specific test would be `[ -x $OTOOLS/bin/$OS/zsh ]', but if
> the file's there, it's likely to be executable.  A more likely source of
> problems, particularly if you are passing arguments with spaces in, in
> which case it's a guaranteed source of problems, is our old friend the sh
> word-splitting behaviour: for example, if you do zsh -c 'echo "hello
> there"' the wrapper will actually in effect invoke zsh -c 'echo' '"hello'
> 'there"' (which is bad).  To keep your arguments intact, try:
> 
> #!/bin/sh
> 
> if [ -x $OTOOLS/bin/$OS/zsh ]; then
>   exec $OTOOLS/bin/$OS/zsh "$@"
> else
>   exec /usr/intel/bin/zsh "$@"
> fi

Ok, I gave this a try.  This doesn't seem to be my problem (this time).
What's happening is that *csh is actually trying to run my script and
immediately failing on the first apparent syntax error.  It's as if it
won't fire off the interpreter correctly:

#!/afs/pdx/proj/otools/bin/zsh -f

prog=${0##*/}
...
...

~% rlsci
Missing }.

As a test, I tried copying Perl to a directory of my own and running a test
with a perl script thinking it might have something to do with me owning
the interpreter.  Evidently that's not it, either.  If I eliminate the
wrapper from the equation, it seems to work fine (but then it's not very
portable).

Thanks,

-Clint