On 5/10/25 11:18 AM, Sam James wrote:
Hi,
Since the following commit on devel
commit c3ca11424d2ae66cafa2f931b008dfb728e209a5
Author: Chet Ramey
Date: Wed Feb 12 11:18:16 2025 -0500
fix issue with redirections to bash input file descriptor; new minimal
chmod buil
On 4/29/21 12:59 PM, Tom (AST) Watson wrote:
All...
I've resigned to having it the way it is, but I note that the solution doesn't
need the backslash escape:
[tsw@box6 ~]$ k=10
[tsw@box6 ~]$ eval echo {1..$k}
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
This one doesn't, but putting in the slash skips the first brac
; as they show themselves.
Thanks for the input. It has been helpful.
...Tom
-Original Message-
From: Chet Ramey
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 07:46
To: Ilkka Virta
Cc: chet.ra...@case.edu; Tom (AST) Watson ;
bug-bash@gnu.org
Subject: [External] Re: Brace expansion ordering vs. paramete
On 4/29/21 8:12 AM, Ilkka Virta wrote:
Maybe, but it's never worked that way and was never intended to. You can
get what you need using eval:
eval echo \{1..${i}}
BTW, was there some background to why they're ordered like this? I'm not
sure if I have heard the story, and didn't s
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 03:12:09PM +0300, Ilkka Virta wrote:
> BTW, was there some background to why they're ordered like this? I'm not
> sure if I have heard the story, and didn't see anything about it in Greg's
> wiki or bash-hackers.org (of course they tell the "what", but not the
> "why"). I di
On 4/26/17 6:13 AM, Florian Mayer wrote:
> - Expansion will be performed like it should be the case, because „{„ is
> obviously a parameter expansion terminal character as the line
> $ echo $BASH_VERSION{nobraceexpansion}
> shows, because this line really does expand $BASH_VERSION
This is not a
wow..., ok thanks for the quick reply
> On 26 Apr 2017, at 12:17, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Florian Mayer wrote:
>> $ echo $BASH_VERSION
>> 4.4.12(1)-release
>> $ echo $BASH_VERSION{nobraceexpansion}
>> 4.4.12(1)-release{nobraceexpansion}
>> $ echo ${BASH_
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Florian Mayer wrote:
> $ echo $BASH_VERSION
> 4.4.12(1)-release
> $ echo $BASH_VERSION{nobraceexpansion}
> 4.4.12(1)-release{nobraceexpansion}
> $ echo ${BASH_VERSION}{brace,expansion}
> 4.4.12(1)-releasebrace 4.4.12(1)-releaseexpansion
> $ echo $BASH_VERSION{brac
On 8/30/16 2:43 PM, Wesley Hirsch wrote:
> My guess is that is caused by the fact that initial
> wordsplitting separates
> the components before brace expansion can get to them, but this is
> unintuitive, and either the behavior should change or the
> documentation
>
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 11:28:44 PM NBaH wrote:
> Do you mind explaining a little bit «the way Bash parses array
> subscripts» ?
>
Didn't notice this reply (as I failed to mention, this is slightly
ridiculous code. Use a loop for important code of course).
It skips over any text between the clo
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 03:31:05 PM Dan Douglas wrote:
> $ bash -c 'printf -v a "%(%s)T" -1; printf "%(%Y%m%d)T " "$a"
"${a[a+=60*60*24,0]"{0..8}"}"; echo'
> 20140510 20140511 20140512 20140513 20140514 20140515 20140516 20140517
20140518 20140519
By the way, I'm not very good at remembering
Le 10/05/2014 22:31, Dan Douglas a écrit :
$ bash -c 'printf -v a "%(%s)T" -1; printf "%(%Y%m%d)T " "$a"
"${a[a+=60*60*24,0]"{0..8}"}"; echo'
20140510 20140511 20140512 20140513 20140514 20140515 20140516 20140517
20140518 20140519
Thank you very much.
This is tremendous!
Do you mind explai
On Saturday, May 10, 2014 02:35:44 PM NBaH wrote:
> bash-4.2 $ printf "%s " "$(date -d -"{0..9}"days +%Y%m%d)" 20140510
> 20140509 20140508 20140507 20140506 20140505 20140504 20140503
> 20140502 20140501
>
> bash-4.3 $ printf "%s " "$(date -d -"{0..9}"days +%Y%m%d)" date: date
> non valide « -{0..
> On 6/5/12 12:14 AM, Scott McMillan wrote:
> > A week or so ago I submitted a bug report using the bashbug command
> > that involved some
> > overflow issues with braces.c on OpenSUSE12.1 X86_64. Browsing the
> > patches, I got
> > the impression that braces.c hasn't been modified since the origin
On 6/5/12 12:14 AM, Scott McMillan wrote:
> A week or so ago I submitted a bug report using the bashbug command
> that involved some
> overflow issues with braces.c on OpenSUSE12.1 X86_64. Browsing the
> patches, I got
> the impression that braces.c hasn't been modified since the original
> 4.2 rel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 3/26/12 6:32 AM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> Hi, hopefully a self-explanatory one today:
>
> ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*-"{1..3}"}" )
> + echo 'a b c' 'a b c' 'a b c'
> a b c a b c a b c
>
> ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*/"{1..3}
On Monday, March 26, 2012 08:07:00 AM you wrote:
> On 03/26/2012 07:56 AM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> > Don't know how much I'm allowed to quote here, but a quick read of the
> > POSIX parsing rules and parameter expansion sections suggest to me that
> > the start of the parameter expansion should be th
On 03/26/2012 07:56 AM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> Don't know how much I'm allowed to quote here, but a quick read of the POSIX
> parsing rules and parameter expansion sections suggest to me that the start
> of the parameter expansion should be the most important factor, and that
> nested quotes and
On Monday, March 26, 2012 01:44:58 PM you wrote:
> Dan Douglas writes:
> > Hi, hopefully a self-explanatory one today:
> > ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*-"{1..3}"}" )
> > + echo 'a b c' 'a b c' 'a b c'
> > a b c a b c a b c
> >
> > ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*/"{1..3}"
Dan Douglas writes:
> Hi, hopefully a self-explanatory one today:
>
> ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*-"{1..3}"}" )
> + echo 'a b c' 'a b c' 'a b c'
> a b c a b c a b c
>
> ~ $ ( set -x -- {a..c}; echo "${*/"{1..3}"/$*}" )
> + echo 'a b c' 'a b c' 'a b c'
> a b c a b c a
On 8/10/11 4:43 PM, gregry . wrote:
> bash> echo {0..9..2}
> 0 2 4 6 8
> bash> echo {00..9..2}
> 00 02 04 06 08
> bash> echo {0..09..2}
> 0 2 4 6 8
> bash> echo {00..09..2}
> 0 2 4 6 8
>
> The first two are as expected, but the last two have unexpected addi
On 2/19/11 6:13 AM, Peter Hofmann wrote:
> Aha, I see. I've read that part about "strictly textual" and "performed
> before all other expansions" in the manual, but I didn't realize all the
> consequences. This means that my quotes get interpreted *after* the
> brace expansion is done, right?
We
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 07:26:18PM -0500, Chet Ramey wrote:
> Brace expansion is strictly textual, is performed before all other
> expansions, and doesn't understand a whole lot of shell syntax.
> It does understand a little about quoted strings, so what you get is
>
> echo "$(echo "1")" "$(e
On 2/18/11 4:32 PM, Peter Hofmann wrote:
> So far, so good. It's what I expected. Let's add another level of
> quotes:
>
> $ echo "$(echo "{1..3}")"
> 1 2 3
>
> Huh? Actually, I was expecting to get the same output as before.
>
> Some debug output:
>
> $ set -x
> $ echo "$(echo "{1..3}")"
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:53:31PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Greg Wooledge writes:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Peter Hofmann wrote:
> >>
> >> $ echo "$(echo "{1..3}")"
> >> 1 2 3
> >>
> >> Huh?
> >
> > Brace expansion is a funny thing. My belief at the moment -- I'm
Greg Wooledge writes:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Peter Hofmann wrote:
>>
>> $ echo "$(echo "{1..3}")"
>> 1 2 3
>>
>> Huh?
>
> Brace expansion is a funny thing. My belief at the moment -- I'm sure
> someone will correct me if I'm wrong -- is that because you've got
> everythi
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Peter Hofmann wrote:
>
> $ echo "$(echo "{1..3}")"
> 1 2 3
>
> Huh?
Brace expansion is a funny thing. My belief at the moment -- I'm sure
someone will correct me if I'm wrong -- is that because you've got
everything quoted up, it's all seen as one "wo
> So... what gives??? I tried looking at info coreutils 'printf
> invocation', and it does not even explicitly spell out what the %d
> argument means, instead it just tells me "it's like the C printf, except
> for these differences". I have never used C, and have no idea where to
> look it up,
Ray Parrish wrote:
> bash: printf: 08: invalid number
> 0
> bash: printf: 09: invalid number
Arithmetic expression/base specifications:
http://bash-hackers.org/wiki/doku.php/syntax/arith_expr#different_bases
Seems to apply for all numerical formats for printf, too.
J.
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009, Ray Parrish wrote:
I'm attempting to study Brace Expansion at the same named page at
bash-hackers.org and it states the following -
Generate numbers with a prefix 001 002 ...
Using a prefix:
for i in 0{1..9} 10; do printf "%d\n" "$i";done
However I am getting *this* outpu
30 matches
Mail list logo
