Fix output of `sage --version`

[leif]

The one who was aiming at the Useless Use of cat Award [1] unfortunately did some wrong escaping, so we currently get for example:

$ ./sage --version
| Sage Version 4.7.2.alpha3-pre7-without-examples, Release Date: 2011-09-28 |
* Warning: this is a prerelease version, and it may be unstable.     *

Also, I don't think the second line should be printed, hence the new version also case-sensitively "greps" for Version, such that we get:

$ ./sage --version
Sage Version 4.7.2.alpha3-pre7-without-examples, Release Date: 2011-09-28

---

[1]  http://partmaps.org/era/unix/award.html

See also  The Tragedy of Bash.

---

Apply trac_11993-fix_sage_--version.scripts.v2.patch to the Sage scripts repository.

[leif]

While we're at it, one for you to review...

[leif]

In case someone should insist on the second line also getting printed, here we go:

sed -n -e '/[Vv]ersion/s/\(^[ |*]\+\)\|\([ |*]\+$\)//gp' ...

[jhpalmieri]

On sage.math:

$ sage -v
Sage Version 4.7.2.alpha4, Release Date: 2011-10-11
$

On OS X:

$ sage -v
$

Same thing happens on Solaris and OpenSolaris. You must be using some GNUisms in your invocation of sed.

[leif]

SCRIPTS repo. Based on Sage 4.7.2.

[leif]

Replying to jhpalmieri:

You must be using some GNUisms in your invocation of sed.

What a terrible failure... 8/

New patch, same place.

[jhpalmieri]

As far as I can tell, you don't need the -e argument for sed, but it doesn't seem to hurt anything either.

I'm also fine with the decision not to print the second line ("* Warning...").

[jdemeyer]

I disagree with makeing here the change

if [ "$1" = '-v' -o "$1" = '-version' -o "$1" = '--version' ]; then 

to

case "$1" in
    -v|-version|--version)

I don't disagree with the change itself, just with the fact that

1. you do it on this ticket
2. only for this command line option

If you want to make this change, please do it on a different ticket and then for all command-line options.

[jhpalmieri]

Replying to jdemeyer:

I disagree with makeing here the change...

I don't have a strong feeling about this, but I think your criticism would be more valid if the script sage-sage were a model of consistency and good style; then altering the style of one part would be a bad idea. But I don't think it is such a model.

If you want to make this change, please do it on a different ticket and then for all command-line options.

I think that we should work on #21 (using a real argument parser and starting to enforce double-hyphens for long options). That ticket needs a lot of work — I'm not sure I like my original approach there, so I may try to rewrite it some day — but rather than patching style issues in sage-sage, it would be better to put the effort elsewhere.

[jdemeyer]

Replying to jhpalmieri:

I don't have a strong feeling about this, but I think your criticism would be more valid if the script sage-sage were a model of consistency and good style;

Actually, I do think it has a consistent bad style.

At least let's not make it less consistent.

Here is a v2 patch, changing only the command itself, not the option parsing.