Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Mikel Ward wrote:
> > I was unfamiliar with ${!VAR}. As far as I can tell, it's not documented
> > in the man page or the info pages.
>
> either your documentation is out of date (old bash install) or you just
> missed
> it. it's under Parameter Expansion.
> -mike
Ah,
On Monday 05 October 2009 23:05:41 Mikel Ward wrote:
> I was unfamiliar with ${!VAR}. As far as I can tell, it's not documented
> in the man page or the info pages.
either your documentation is out of date (old bash install) or you just missed
it. it's under Parameter Expansion.
-mike
signat
Hi
I came across a script that did
$ VARIABLE1=value1
$ VARIABLE2=value2
$ for VAR in VARIABLE1 VARIABLE2
> do
> echo ${VAR}=${!VAR}
> done
VARIABLE1=value1
VARIABLE2=value2
I was unfamiliar with ${!VAR}. As far as I can tell, it's not documented in
the man page or the info pages.
I assume it
Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>>> clemens fischer writes:
>>>
I have the following construct in a script:
... a number of commands
{
... a number of commands
} 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
It seems anything inside the braces is not seen by bash, and
peter360 wrote:
> Thanks Adreas. That was what I suspected in my reply to Bob. But Bob
> disagreed. Looks like there were some confusion about this feature even
> among experts. Seems another reason to deprecate the feature.
I don't think anything I said disagreed with what Andreas said. It
clemens fischer wrote:
> I have the following construct in a script:
>
> ... a number of commands
> {
> ... a number of commands
> } 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
>
> It seems anything inside the braces is not seen by bash, and it doesn't
> show up in a "sh -x ..." trace, but ${pro
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 07:55:33PM +0200, clemens fischer wrote:
> >> {
> >> ... a number of commands
> >> } 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
> yeah ok, but the commands really are not executed. I have an option
> dry-run in the script, which sets "prog_log=true". Then there are
> a bun
clemens fischer wrote:
Andreas Schwab wrote:
clemens fischer writes:
I have the following construct in a script:
... a number of commands
{
... a number of commands
} 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
It seems anything inside the braces is not seen by bash, and it
doesn't show up
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> clemens fischer writes:
>
>> I have the following construct in a script:
>>
>> ... a number of commands
>> {
>> ... a number of commands
>> } 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
>>
>> It seems anything inside the braces is not seen by bash, and it
>> doesn't show u
clemens fischer writes:
> I have the following construct in a script:
>
> ... a number of commands
> {
> ... a number of commands
> } 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
>
> It seems anything inside the braces is not seen by bash, and it doesn't
> show up in a "sh -x ..." trace, but ${pro
Thanks Adreas. That was what I suspected in my reply to Bob. But Bob
disagreed. Looks like there were some confusion about this feature even
among experts. Seems another reason to deprecate the feature.
-peter
Andreas Schwab-2 wrote:
>
> peter360 writes:
>
>> That makes sense. So the
'uname -rims'
Linux 2.6.31.1-spott i686 AuthenticAMD
'bash --version'
GNU bash, version 4.0.24(1)-release (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
I have the following construct in a script:
... a number of commands
{
... a number of commands
} 2>&1 | ${prog_log} "${logfile}"
It seems anything inside th
12 matches
Mail list logo
