This includes a fairly detailed test of various known shell bugs from the
autoconf docs.
The idea here is that if redo works on your system, you should be able to
rely on a *good* shell to run your .do files; you shouldn't have to work
around zillions of bugs like autoconf does.
This is slightly inelegant, as the old style
echo foo
echo blah
chmod a+x $3
doesn't work anymore; the stuff you wrote to stdout didn't end up in $3.
You can rewrite it as:
exec >$3
echo foo
echo blah
chmod a+x $3
Anyway, it's better this way, because now we can tell the difference between
a zero-length $3 and a nonexistent one. A .do script can thus produce
either one and we'll either delete the target or move the empty $3 to
replace it, whichever is right.
As a bonus, this simplifies our detection of whether you did something weird
with overlapping changes to stdout and $3.
We would build 'somefile' correctly the first time, but we wouldn't
attach the dependency on somefile to the right $TARGET, so our target would
not auto-rebuild in the future based on somefile.
It actually decreases readability of the .do files - by not making it
explicit when you're going into a subdir.
Plus it adds ambiguity: what if there's a dirname.do *and* a dirname/all?
We could resolve the ambiguity if we wanted, but that adds more code, while
taking out this special case makes *less* code and improves readability.
I think it's the right way to go.
