On Saturday 12 November 2011 02:02:01 Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2011, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
> > On Friday 11 November 2011 19:32:51 Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> >> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
> >>> Hi list,
> >
On Friday 11 November 2011 19:32:51 Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
> > Hi list,
> >
> > I've got a question about commandline args, imagine:
> >
> > personal_function ab{c,d}
> >
> > personal_fun
Hi list,
I've got a question about commandline args, imagine:
personal_function ab{c,d}
personal_function will receive abc and abd.
Is there a way to make it receive ab{c,d}
instead (without chaning the arguement itself)?
(The actual problem is not that personal_function
can't handle the arg, b
On Saturday 22 January 2011 09:29:11 ali hagigat wrote:
> I want to print the return value of an executable like:
> make -q -f makefile22
> The above command returns non-zero if the targets are not up to date.
> How can i see that value by shell commands. I am using /bin/bash,
> Fedora gnome-termin
> > You might reinstall your OS one day, either due to hardware failure or
> > simply upgrading. Then you might forget to build the rm alias.
... it's set by one of my applications and xrm is part of that applications
script-chain.
It's rc is called from .bashrc and that sets-up the alias.
Whe
> It's a bad idea to alias rm. It would be better to use your xrm
> directly. If you alias rm and get in the habit of it protecting you,
> one of these days the alias won't be there and OOPS, gone!
Well... I know what you mean, but I'm using GNU/Linux for seven years now, it's
now
almost impossib
Am Sun, 26 Sep 2010 18:09:16 -0400 (EDT)
schrieb "Chris F.A. Johnson" :
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
>
> > btw. How can I remove the last arguement ${!#} ?
> >
> > I tried args=${@:-${!#}} but that won't work.
>
> ar
btw. How can I remove the last arguement ${!#} ?
I tried args=${@:-${!#}} but that won't work.
Chris
> Style is a matter of taste, but I think this is equivalent (not tested):
>
> xrm () {
> for path in "$@"; do
> test ${path:0:1} == - && local RMO+="$path " && continue
> for try in "$path" "${path%/*}"; do
> test -e "$try"/.dirinfo || continue
Hi all,
I'm writing a wrapper for rm, which does not let the file/directory be removed,
if
there's a .dirinfo file in the directory containing "NoDelete".
(feel free to ask what that's all about.)
This is what I have:
xrm () {
for path in $@; do
if [[ $path == -* || $p
Hi all,
I'm struggling around at translating a shell script. Well I've set it up, the
pot file
contains all strings, the german .po file is finished, but: the strings won't
show up...
Actually it's just a test how good translation works for shell-scripts. (It's
an huge
amount of strings I woul
Am Tue, 9 Mar 2010 11:34:04 -0500
schrieb Chet Ramey :
> Am I the only one who didn't receive any actual message content here?
>
You're not.
--
KDE 3.1 no no no no no
Gesendet von Jonny am Sa, 9. Nov um 8:36
KDE ist nur windows Nachbildung
Es ist viel zu fehlerhaft und viel zu langsa
Am Mon, 22 Feb 2010 02:30:32 -0800 (PST)
schrieb pbr :
> bashbug called sendmail, a link to exim4 which silently ignored the
> following (which is a bug in its own right) so I'll post this manually
> instead.
>
> I found two one-liners which crash bash.
>
> Configuration Information [Automatical
Am Tue, 7 Jul 2009 14:37:20 -0400
schrieb Greg Wooledge :
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 08:16:50PM +0200, Christopher Roy Bratusek
> wrote:
> > unsource: the opposite of source (while source is making functions
> > publically available, unsource would remove them)
>
> You c
Hi all,
what I'm currently missing are the following two things (I'm not 100%
sure if they are not available):
unsource: the opposite of source (while source is making functions
publically available, unsource would remove them)
exchange: exchanges the value of two variables (x=2 y=a; exchange x
15 matches
Mail list logo
