On 2009-02-10, Chet Ramey chet.ra...@case.edu wrote:
I'm not immediately sure where you got that, but the documentation makes
it clear:
-e Exit immediately if a simple command (see SHELL GRAMMAR
above) exits with a non-zero status. The shell does not
Ulrich Drepper in comment 6 to redhat bug 483385 links to
austin-group-l, item 11863 by Geoff Clare:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483385#c6
https://www.opengroup.org/sophocles/show_mail.tpl?CALLER=index.tplsource=Llistname=austin-group-lid=11863
Geoff Clare writes: [...]
I think
Ronny Standtke ronny.stand...@fhnw.ch wrote:
The -n option not seem to work. Example with a little stupid nonsense
script:
---
ro...@ronny-desktop:/tmp$ cat test.sh
#!/bin/sh
if [ $blah == test]
This sort of error can't be caught by -n, because it's part of a
specific command, not
Not sure this is correct. The ] is parsed by the shell but only if it
surrounded by whitespace. This is why the -n option reports an error,
since -n suppresses command execution.
I suspect the behaviour is required by posix or at least historical
precedent.
jon.
On 12/02/2009, at 7:04,
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Paul Jarc p...@po.cwru.edu wrote:
Jon Seymour jon.seym...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure this is correct. The ] is parsed by the shell
It's parsed by the [ command. That happens to be a builtin command,
so yes, it is done by the shell, but it is not part of the
I would like to propose a new command for bash:
ca [path]
It returns the canonical path based on the current working directory and
entered path.
If the current working directory has been traversed through a symbolic
link, then listing a higher level path using dotdot's do not always show
On Wednesday 11 February 2009 23:38:10 Rolf Brudeseth wrote:
I would like to propose a new command for bash:
ca [path]
It returns the canonical path based on the current working directory and
entered path.
If the current working directory has been traversed through a symbolic
link, then
