On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 06:58 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: > This is sort of a compromise area. The last time I worked on it, I > almost added the shebang in. But, as Randy says, the BLFS intention is > for you to be pasting the commands into a shell. Here, though, it > actually says to write a script, so maybe it should be written as a > real script instead just the shell commands.
If the instructions aren't part of a script, what exactly does the "bash -e" step contribute? Start a new shell for running commands in, which should exit any time one of them fails? The -e might be useful in an shell script (i.e the #!/bin/bash case), but what's the point for an interactive shell? Simon.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
