On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:58:24 -0500 Randy Barlow wrote: > On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:52:10 +0100 > Hinnerk van Bruinehsen <h.v.bruineh...@fu-berlin.de> wrote: > > There are some other options of "nesting" as well. You can use > > backticks "`" or $(...) to run a command "inside" another. An example > > would be emerge `qlist -CI x11-drivers` (or the equivalent emerge > > $(qlist -CI x11-drivers) ) . This would run "qlist -CI > > x11-drivers" (lists installed packages of the category x11-drivers) > > and use this output for emerge (which will effectively result in > > reinstalling every package from the x11-drivers category). > > As I understand it, the $(...) syntax is the preferred way of nesting, > as opposed to backticks. I think this may be due to backticks requiring > some special escaping that the $(...) syntax does not require. I > attempted a brief search for supporting information, but didn't find a > definitive source to back up my claims :)
The reason for $(...) being preferred is simple: you can nest $($($(...))), but you can't nest `...`. Deep nesting is quite useful indeed. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgpv4whI_T8sT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
