Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
zed.d/pool_import-led.sh: fix for current zpool scripts (and a few bonus touchups) #11935
zed.d/pool_import-led.sh: fix for current zpool scripts (and a few bonus touchups) #11935
Changes from all commits
8d396e3
46b243a
7e1ebbc
5fba732
66c0a07
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is the point of this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This can manipulate many fault LEDs at a time and describes a general rule, also making terminology consistent with the rest
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is the point of this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As noted: seq is a very spotty GNU extension (and also not checked for at the top), so when not available this resolves to
for _ in ; do
which I assume you can guess why is less than optimal. (Plus, it's literally five numbers, do you really need to spawn a process for it?)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Has checkbashisms said that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hm, I've misremembered apparently, according to FreeBSD's seq(1) it's had a tumultuous history (as ported from GNU shellutils and/or P9) and should be available on most recent fully-configured UNIXes, but I've also definitely used systems without it in recent years.
Plus, if the portability to small systems doesn't appeal to you, then the performance gains of not using a process to generate 5 numbers that are, in sum, shorter than the process substitution definitely will.
and dunno, haven't run checkbashisms, but it probably won't