# HG changeset patch
# User "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
# Date 1336494670 -7200
# Node ID 11b93b849695f7ae1d3430afe606dfea210e1336
# Parent  073a24df885218c38338d768c8e089522a541416
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>
(transplanted from d48c03998dc1c25a3b29b2c0af425631baee3abe)

diff -r 073a24df8852 -r 11b93b849695 scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in
--- a/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in	Sat May 05 23:04:21 2012 +0200
+++ b/scripts/crosstool-NG.sh.in	Tue May 08 18:31:10 2012 +0200
@@ -596,6 +596,10 @@
         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