From 08f2b68bfb4e9f495241ed66c7fababfd3f716ad Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Yann E. MORIN\"" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 18:31:10 +0200
Subject: scripts: fix catching failures

POSIX 1003.1-2008 does not say whether "set -e" should catch a sub-shell
that exits with !0 (it has a list of conditions to catch, but no list of
conditions not to catch, and this situation is not listed).

bash-3 does not catch such a failure, but bash-4 does. That why, on my
Squeeze system I did not see the issue, while Thomas did on is Lenny chroot.

Reported-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
Signed-off-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>

diff --git a/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in b/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in
index d794743..818723f 100644
--- a/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in
+++ b/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in
@@ -596,6 +596,10 @@ if [ "${CT_ONLY_DOWNLOAD}" != "y" -a "${CT_ONLY_EXTRACT}" != "y" ]; then
         fi
         if [ ${do_it} -eq 1 ]; then
             ( do_${step} )
+            # POSIX 1003.1-2008 does not say if "set -e" should catch a
+            # sub-shell ending with !0. bash-3 does not, while bash-4 does,
+            # so the following line is for bash-3; bash-4 would choke above.
+            [ $? -ne 0 ]
             if [ "${CT_STOP}" = "${step}" ]; then
                 do_stop=1
             fi
-- 
cgit v0.10.2-6-g49f6