Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Tom Metro wrote:
>> run-parts probably doesn't involve
>> itself in managing the output of the jobs it runs, and therefore it
>> doesn't know if a job has produced any output.
> Without checking source code, that seems to be incorrect: quoting
> run-parts(8):
>--rep
Tom Metro wrote:
> run-parts probably doesn't involve
> itself in managing the output of the jobs it runs, and therefore it
> doesn't know if a job has produced any output.
Without checking source code, that seems to be incorrect: quoting
run-parts(8):
--report
similar to --v
2 matches
Mail list logo
