Em 17-10-2015 14:12, Fernando de Oliveira escreveu:

> So, the preference now in the book is not to use braces.
> 
> Will modify one update I 'm going to do, to leave without braces.

I did modify.

Discussing from a technical point of view.

It may be difficult reading or writing with braces. But it is much
better in terms or information. To write or read, what I do is (using
the example that started the thread in -book:


$ ls -d /usr/{include,share/{gtk-doc/html,}}/poppler
/usr/include/poppler  /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/poppler  /usr/share//poppler

Here, I see that it should have een written:

/usr/{include,share{/gtk-doc/html,}}/poppler

Thus:

$ ls -d /usr/{include,share{/gtk-doc/html,}}/poppler
/usr/include/poppler  /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/poppler  /usr/share/poppler

I would like to continue using braces. I see that all directories are
named poppler, they are all under /usr, one under include and two under
share, a proper poppler and another for gtk-doc/html. All in one inspection.

For the separated ones, the interpretation is not unified.

If I'm doing it under DESTDIr, I use a "." or remove first slash:

$ ls -d ./usr/{include,share{/gtk-doc/html,}}/poppler
./usr/include/poppler ./usr/share/gtk-doc/html/poppler ./usr/share/poppler

or

$ ls -d usr/{include,share{/gtk-doc/html,}}/poppler
usr/include/poppler usr/share/gtk-doc/html/poppler usr/share/poppler


Can I go on using braces?

-- 
[]s,
Fernando, aka Sísifo
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to