Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Reuti
Am 01.03.2017 um 22:14 schrieb Chet Ramey: >> […] >> >> is still there. > > This was fixed back in November as part of the work prompted by this > report: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2016-11/msg00101.html > > I've attached a patch people can play around with. Indeed, then

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Chet Ramey
On 3/1/17 3:32 PM, Reuti wrote: > > Am 01.03.2017 um 21:24 schrieb Grisha Levit: > >> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Reuti wrote: >>> I would say not closed, as it's still happening in 4.4.12. And if it's >>> closed, it should be reopened. >> >> Are you using the same example? I can reproduce

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Reuti
Am 01.03.2017 um 21:24 schrieb Grisha Levit: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Reuti wrote: >> I would say not closed, as it's still happening in 4.4.12. And if it's >> closed, it should be reopened. > > Are you using the same example? I can reproduce Geoff's original test > case with 4.3 but

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Grisha Levit
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Reuti wrote: > I would say not closed, as it's still happening in 4.4.12. And if it's > closed, it should be reopened. Are you using the same example? I can reproduce Geoff's original test case with 4.3 but not with 4.4..

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Reuti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 01.03.2017 um 20:27 schrieb Geoff Hull: > Aha! That's it. Case closed, I think. I would say not closed, as it's still happening in 4.4.12. And if it's closed, it should be reopened. - -- Reuti -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: GPGTools - h

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Geoff Hull
Aha! That's it. Case closed, I think. Thanks, Geoff On 2 March 2017 at 05:07, Reuti wrote: > > > Am 01.03.2017 um 16:53 schrieb Grisha Levit : > > > > On Mar 1, 2017 1:04 AM, "Geoff Hull" wrote: > > If I want to go back to the behaviour I first experienced then I put the > default COMMAND_PROM

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Reuti
> Am 01.03.2017 um 16:53 schrieb Grisha Levit : > > On Mar 1, 2017 1:04 AM, "Geoff Hull" wrote: > If I want to go back to the behaviour I first experienced then I put the > default COMMAND_PROMPT back > > I reported the multi-line alias and PROMPT_COMMAND interaction last June. The > behavior

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Grisha Levit
On Mar 1, 2017 1:04 AM, "Geoff Hull" wrote: If I want to go back to the behaviour I first experienced then I put the default COMMAND_PROMPT back I reported the multi-line alias and PROMPT_COMMAND interaction last June. The behavior you note should be fixed in 4.4. https://lists.gnu.org/archive

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-03-01 Thread Reuti
Hi, > Am 01.03.2017 um 07:04 schrieb Geoff Hull : > > Hi Reuti, Andreas, > > Yes, forgot to mention the bash versions I have tried: 4.3.46 on Arch Linux > and 4.1.2 on CentOS 6.8. > > This is getting weirder: I've found I can replicate the behaviour you are > getting Reuti, if I first do this

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-02-28 Thread Geoff Hull
Hi Reuti, Andreas, Yes, forgot to mention the bash versions I have tried: 4.3.46 on Arch Linux and 4.1.2 on CentOS 6.8. This is getting weirder: I've found I can replicate the behaviour you are getting Reuti, if I first do this command: unset COMMAND_PROMPT If I want to go back to the behaviour

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-02-28 Thread Reuti
> Am 28.02.2017 um 14:21 schrieb Reuti : > > Hi, > >> Am 28.02.2017 um 11:00 schrieb Andreas Schwab : >> >> On Feb 28 2017, Geoff Hull wrote: >> >>> If I "source" the attached file (i.e. ". test_aliases") in a bash session, >>> then run the following: >>> >>> assemble_fam1 >>> assemble_fam2

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-02-28 Thread Reuti
Hi, > Am 28.02.2017 um 11:00 schrieb Andreas Schwab : > > On Feb 28 2017, Geoff Hull wrote: > >> If I "source" the attached file (i.e. ". test_aliases") in a bash session, >> then run the following: >> >> assemble_fam1 >> assemble_fam2 >> say_families >> >> I see the following output: >> >>

Re: "Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-02-28 Thread Andreas Schwab
On Feb 28 2017, Geoff Hull wrote: > If I "source" the attached file (i.e. ". test_aliases") in a bash session, > then run the following: > > assemble_fam1 > assemble_fam2 > say_families > > I see the following output: > > Flintstones=wilma:bam-bam:fred > Rubbles=barney It seems like the shell is

"Variation" in Command Substitution Behaviour

2017-02-27 Thread Geoff Hull
I think the following is a bug, but I'm not really sure. I've checked the documentation for differences between old-style command substitution ( `...` ) and new-style ( $(...) ), and couldn't see anything that related to this problem. *Background* At my place of work, I use some loops with variab