On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 5:29 AM, Joerg Schilling
wrote:
> Dan Douglas wrote:
>
>> There's not much agreement however on what constitutes a "trailing
>> space". Almost every possible interpretation exists in some
>> implementation and even varies with compatibility modes in a few
>> cases. Some sh
Without getting into the specifics of the proposed change yet, I'd
like someone to explain just what is the fascination with using -C
and '>' for making lock files?
The time honoured way of making lock files (since way, way, back) is via
the use of link(2) (or ln(1)) which has always provided for
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1016
==
Reported By:izabera
Assigned To:
==
Dan Douglas wrote:
> There's not much agreement however on what constitutes a "trailing
> space". Almost every possible interpretation exists in some
> implementation and even varies with compatibility modes in a few
> cases. Some shells look eagerly to the next word without considering
> nesting
Shware Systems wrote:
> These changes treat 'failure to redirect' as a 'command is valid but failed
> to execute'
> additional exec*() error, and testable status if a redirection is supposed to
> affect succeeding utility invocations in a script. I feel this is consistent
> with the current
> i
