On 19 Jan 2026, at 05:50, Paul Scott wrote:
(My subscription at [email protected] is still not working).
On 1/18/26 9:12 PM, David Wright wrote:
On Sun 18 Jan 2026 at 11:25:08 (-0700), Paul Scott wrote:
On 18 Jan 2026, at 07:50, Paul Scott <[email protected]> wrote:
I am posting a similar question on the Debian user list:
[ … ] About 70% of the time a link command like the following
works [ … ]
It turns out the problem was something I wasn't aware of that was
pointed out by a Debian user:
The solution was to execute:
hash -d lilypond
after creating the link. Or clear the entire hash with
hash -r
Each instance of bash has its own hash, and commands have to be used
to be remembered. So any bash instance that hasn't yet run lilypond
will have no hash entry for it, and finds the new symlink straight away.
Hence your 70% success rate.
Thank you, David.
I currently don't know how this hash business works, just that it
solved the problem. I know what a hash means, just not what it does here.
If you want to see how the bash is executing commands read the section
"Command execution" in https://www.computerhope.com/unix/ubash.htm.
Some sensible use cases are in the answers to this question:
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/86012/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-hash-command
Regards,
Helge
