On Friday 07 May 2010 08:49:26 Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 09:30:20AM -0500, Chuck Remes wrote:
> > e.g.
> > [ -z "$PS1" ] && return
>
> That's certainly *not* how I'd write that check. If the goal is to
> protect a block of commands from running when the shell is invoked
> wit
Le 07/05/2010 15:21, Peng Yu a écrit :
> Would you please elaborate a little more on how to use LD_PRELOAD to
> modify the call. If the library (for example, 'open' from stdlib.h)
> is statically compiled in the binary, is LD_PRELOAD going to replace
> it with a different 'open' function?
Header
On 05/07/2010 09:31 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 05/07/2010 09:02 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
>>> Suppose I need to modify one primary file slightly to do something a
>>> little bit different. But I still need to do the original job,
>>> therefore I need to
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 09:02 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
>> Suppose I need to modify one primary file slightly to do something a
>> little bit different. But I still need to do the original job,
>> therefore I need to keep it the original M files. I can copy the
On 05/07/2010 09:02 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
> Suppose I need to modify one primary file slightly to do something a
> little bit different. But I still need to do the original job,
> therefore I need to keep it the original M files. I can copy the whole
> directory and then modify one file in the newly c
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Marc Herbert wrote:
> Le 06/05/2010 15:53, Peng Yu a écrit :
>> Suppose that I have a symbolic link link1 pointing to file1. When I
>> write to link1, I don't want file1 change. I want it to remove the
>> link generated a new file and write to it.
>
> This is a very
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Peng Yu wrote:
>> Is there a way to overload operators like '>' and '>>' in bash, just
>> as overloading in C++, etc. Suppose I have already made some bash
>> program using '>' and '>>' without thinking about symbolic link, but I
>> begin aware o
Le 06/05/2010 15:53, Peng Yu a écrit :
> Suppose that I have a symbolic link link1 pointing to file1. When I
> write to link1, I don't want file1 change. I want it to remove the
> link generated a new file and write to it.
This is a very strange question. Symbolic links are expressly designed
to f
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 09:30:20AM -0500, Chuck Remes wrote:
> The standard .bashrc contains a line of code that precludes certain scripts
> from executing. It has to do with
> the logic for checking if the session is interactive.
There's no such thing as a "standard .bashrc", at least not from
