Re: set -e in bash 4

2009-10-22 Thread Tobias Poschwatta
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 09:56:49PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: > Yes, this is the intended behavior. Thanks for clarifying. > This is one of the things that > came out of the discussions among the Posix working group. It also > matches historical practice. I searched the archives and found thi

Re: set -e in bash 4

2009-10-21 Thread Chet Ramey
Tobias Poschwatta wrote: > In the following test case test1.sh, bash 4 behaves differently from > bash 3.1. The behaviour of bash 3.1 is what I would expect to be > correct. Is this a bug in bash 4 or an intentional change? > > Using bash 4: > > $ /bin/bash --version > GNU bash, version 4.0.28(1

Re: set -e in bash 4

2009-10-21 Thread Tobias Poschwatta
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:19:52AM +0100, Marc Herbert wrote: > Tobias Poschwatta a écrit : > > In the following test case test1.sh, bash 4 behaves differently from > > bash 3.1. The behaviour of bash 3.1 is what I would expect to be > > correct. Is this a bug in bash 4 or an intentional change?

Re: set -e in bash 4

2009-10-21 Thread Marc Herbert
Tobias Poschwatta a écrit : > In the following test case test1.sh, bash 4 behaves differently from > bash 3.1. The behaviour of bash 3.1 is what I would expect to be > correct. Is this a bug in bash 4 or an intentional change? Isn't this related to this change? http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.

set -e in bash 4

2009-10-20 Thread Tobias Poschwatta
In the following test case test1.sh, bash 4 behaves differently from bash 3.1. The behaviour of bash 3.1 is what I would expect to be correct. Is this a bug in bash 4 or an intentional change? Using bash 4: $ /bin/bash --version GNU bash, version 4.0.28(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Copyright