Chet Ramey wrote: >> Will setting pipefail have any effect on this? If not, then is there a >> way to make bash abort when one of the pipeline components fails, >> without too much additional code?
Not easily. >> On the other hand, to match the documentation, you would also have to >> fix cases such as: >> >> set -e >> true && false >> echo done >> >> As they are not simple commands either, right? The manpage even >> explicitly says that it "does not exit if the command that fails is >> [...] part of a && or ││ list". > > That's true, except every other shell behaves this way. It works for > compatibility. I'm going to have to audit this stuff, at the very > least. I should add that it's pretty much unanimous consensus among the `major' shell implementers that this ambiguous language is a defect in the standard, and the failure of the rightmost command in an AND or OR list should cause the shell to exit. I think the current behavior, once the pipeline stuff is fixed, is pretty much correct. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
