Re: BASH_ARGC and BASH_ARGV are empty

2005-02-17 Thread Nicholas Sushkin
On Thursday 17 February 2005 20:55, Chet Ramey wrote: > > Shouldn't BASH_ARGC be something like ([0]=>3, [1]=>3) > > and BASH_ARGV contain words "calling function b calling function a"? > > FUNCNAME correctly returns "b a" > > BASH_ARGC and BASH_ARGV are set only in `extended debug' mode; > enabl

Re: BASH_ARGC and BASH_ARGV are empty

2005-02-17 Thread Chet Ramey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: i386 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: i386-redhat-linux-gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i386' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i386-redhat-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='re

BASH_ARGC and BASH_ARGV are empty

2005-02-17 Thread nsushkin
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: i386 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: i386-redhat-linux-gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i386' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i386-redhat-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='redhat' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/s