Hi Michael
--- "Michael H. Warfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2002 at 05:03:38PM -0700, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> > Hi Michael,
> > Thanks a lot for your help.
>
> > Two constructs:
> > " > /dev/null 2>&1"
> > "2>&1 > /dev/null"
>
> > [ ... ]
> > I understand now: the result of both constructs is the *same*, but
> > you seem to be disagreeing: "That ["2>&1 > /dev/null"] probably
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
... just you to make it clear: I *thought* you'd probably be
disagreeing (tho' I actually didn't know ...)
> > won't do what you want and certainly does NOT do what's above
> > [i.e." > /dev/null 2>&1", and I didn't understand the rest of your
> > sentence - important? - :] (unless stdout was aleady directed
> > to /dev/null)."
>
> Ok... Let me do this through example...
>
> Script one calls script two as follows...
>
> Script 1:
>
> [ ... ]
I'll let you know as soon as I understood what you were explaining
(it will take me some time ... :) ... )
Again: thanks a lot. :)
Wolfgang
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
