Hello,
Am Montag, 8. August 2011 19:20:25 UTC+2 schrieb Steven W. Orr:
>
> if (( debug ))
> then
> _debug()
> {
> "$@"
> # I do question whether this is a viable construct, versus
> # eval "$@"
> }
> else
> _debug()
> {
> :
> }
> f
Hello
Sorry for the delay.
I've applied your expr-noeval.patch file to the bash-4.2.10-4.fc15 package
provided by fedora.
The problem seems solved. :)
Thanks !
D
--
Damien Nadé
Astek Sud-Est pour France Télécom - FT/OF/OFA/DMGP/PORTAIL/DOP/DEV/EAQS
Sophia Antipolis - France /
2011-08-10 23:05:26 +, Karl Berry:
> not sure who to report that to
>
> I've asked the FSF sysadmins. I can see from the mailing list
> configuration that the gateway is intended to be operational, but don't
> know how to debug what it happening from there.
[...]
Thanks Karl.
My last su
Hi!
I often get a bash message about new mail during command line completion.
Steps to reproduce:
Type "ls ~/.bas" and press tab.
Expected result:
Command line completed to "ls ~/.bash" or whatever is right.
Actual result:
If new mails have arrived, the mail check is performed when pressing
tab
Hi!
If the current word on the command line contains a shell variable, then
the expansion works as if the variable had been expanded, but then
quotes the variable. An example is probably a lot better than theory:
Steps to reproduce
1. Type "echo $HOME/.bas"
2. Press tab
3. Press tab again
Actual
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:23:00AM -0700, pjodrr wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Am Montag, 8. August 2011 19:20:25 UTC+2 schrieb Steven W. Orr:
>>
>> if (( debug ))
>> then
>> _debug()
>> {
>> "$@"
>> # I do question whether this is a viable construct, versus
>> # eval "$
On 08/10/2011 10:39 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
Chet Ramey wrote:
> If not, then wouldn't
> $((( ))) be turned into $( (( )) ), meaning the arith returns a
> status,
> and not the calculation. (I've tested this, and this is the case.
Then I said:
"It sounded to me like $(( )) would be translated in
Great website (http://wiki.bash-hackers.org) explaining the changes in bash-4.*
along with all other versions. (The web pages also note it's not a full list of
changes.)
In the past, I've scanned Bash's ChangeLog and it didn't provide any meaningful
explanations, just very brief details.
(It wou
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:23:47PM -0700, Linda W wrote:
> 1 #!/bin/bash
> 2
> 30
> 31 # trace control for subs
> 32 declare -ix Allow_Trace=$(((
> 33 _D_LowLevel |
> 34 _D_Provides |
> 35 _D_
> 36
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 03:48:51AM -0800, Roger wrote:
>Great website (http://wiki.bash-hackers.org) explaining the changes in bash-4.*
>along with all other versions. (The web pages also note it's not a full list
>of
>changes.)
>
>In the past, I've scanned Bash's ChangeLog and it didn't provid
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:23:00AM -0700, pjodrr wrote:
> they call it "collapsing functions":
> http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/howto/collapsing_functions
"The first time you run chatter(), the function redefines itself based on the
value of verbose. Thereafter chatter doesn't check $verbose anymore
Am Donnerstag, 11. August 2011 14:13:27 UTC+2 schrieb Greg Wooledge:
> The problem with this is that you can't switch to the other function
> later.
this is intended. The idea is to call a script with a debug
or no-debug option. So for the runtime of the script the
debug() function does not chan
2011-05-30, 06:34(+00), Michael Witten:
[...]
> Ben, it is generally a good idea to maintain the `Cc' list unless
> explicitly asked.
Beware that the bash mailing list also has a usenet interface
(gnu.bash.bug) which has no notion of recipients let alone Cc.
--
Stephane
2011-08-08, 13:55(-07), Linda Walsh:
[...]
> and both 'exit' and 'return' should return error "ERANGE" if "--posix" is
> set, and -1 is given. Iinvalid option doesn't make as much sense, in
> this situtation, if it was -k or -m, sure...but in this case, it's a fact
> that --posix artificially limi
2011-08-02, 17:05(+04), Dmitry Bolshakov:
[...]
> perl has "-x" switch which makes it skip leading file contents until the
> #!/bin/perl
> line
>
> imho it would be good to have the same feature in bash
What about:
#! /bin/bash -
:||:<<\#__END__
whatever you like here
#__END__
your script star
2011-08-9, 11:44(+10), Jon Seymour:
> Has anyone ever come across an equivalent to Linux's readlink -f that
> is implemented purely in bash?
>
> (I need readlink's function on AIX where it doesn't seem to be available).
[...]
What about:
readlink_f() (
link=$1 max_iterations=40
while [ "$max_
2011-08-02, 23:41(+02), mhenn:
> Am 02.08.2011 15:55, schrieb Stephane CHAZELAS:
[...]
>> What about:
>>
>> #! /bin/bash -
>> :||:<<\#__END__
>>
>> whatever you like here
>>
>> #__END__
[...]
> Why did you use :||:<< ...
> and not just :<<... ?
>
> when testing it, it doesn't make any difference
2011-08-9, 09:24(+00), Stephane CHAZELAS:
> 2011-08-9, 11:44(+10), Jon Seymour:
>> Has anyone ever come across an equivalent to Linux's readlink -f that
>> is implemented purely in bash?
>>
>> (I need readlink's function on AIX where it doesn't seem to be available).
> [...]
>
> What about:
>
> rea
2011-08-09, 11:29(+02), Bernd Eggink:
> On 09.08.2011 03:44, Jon Seymour wrote:
>> Has anyone ever come across an equivalent to Linux's readlink -f that
>> is implemented purely in bash?
>
> You can find my version here:
>
> http://sudrala.de/en_d/shell-getlink.html
>
> As it contains some co
2011-08-10, 12:00(+02), Bernd Eggink:
[...]
> function f
> {
> local OPTIND=1
>
> echo "\$1=$1"
> }
>
> while getopts "abcdefg" opt
> do
> echo "opt=$opt"
> f $opt
> done
>
>
> Calling the sript like this works fine:
> script -a -b -c
>
> B
2011-08-09, 09:50(-04), Steven W. Orr:
[...]
> *) To remove the trailing slashes, instead of
>
> while [[ $file == */ ]]
> do
> file=${file%/}
> done
>
> file=${file##*/}# file name
>
> just say
> file="${file%${file
Am Donnerstag, 11. August 2011 12:40:24 UTC+2 schrieb Roger:
> Just a quick response here, "ifdef style" is C code not compiled into the
> compiled program if it is not defined or chosen to be enabled. This in turn,
> prevents the CPU from wasting cycles testing if/then statements, etc...
yes, I
On 8/10/11 10:59 PM, Clark J. Wang wrote:
>> How can people write stable scripts in an enironment of constant change?
>> This is creating the exact opposite of what POSIX is supposed to help!
>>
>
> I found the similar problem. Bash has changed a lot since 2.05b which is the
> 1st version of bas
On 8/11/11 6:23 AM, Martin von Gagern wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I often get a bash message about new mail during command line completion.
>
> Steps to reproduce:
> Type "ls ~/.bas" and press tab.
>
> Expected result:
> Command line completed to "ls ~/.bash" or whatever is right.
>
> Actual result:
> If
Hi Chet,
thanks for the swift reply!
On 11.08.2011 15:54, Chet Ramey wrote:
> I suspect that you have a completion defined for `ls' and it's running a
> command or process substitution that's causing the mail check. Can you
> run `set -x', then attempt the completion again and post the results?
On 8/11/11 10:35 AM, Martin von Gagern wrote:
> Hi Chet,
>
> thanks for the swift reply!
>
> On 11.08.2011 15:54, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> I suspect that you have a completion defined for `ls' and it's running a
>> command or process substitution that's causing the mail check. Can you
>> run `set -x
On 09.08.2011 16:54, Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
2011-08-09, 09:50(-04), Steven W. Orr:
[...]
*) To remove the trailing slashes, instead of
while [[ $file == */ ]]
do
file=${file%/}
done
file=${file##*/}# file name
jus
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 08:13:27AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:23:00AM -0700, pjodrr wrote:
>> they call it "collapsing functions":
>> http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/howto/collapsing_functions
>
>"The first time you run chatter(), the function redefines itself based on t
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:38:17PM -0800, Roger wrote:
> OK. Now I see the collapsing, and it seems more like a hidden collapse rather
> then an immediately apparent collapse from an initial stance after
> reading/tracing. When tracing this function, I was thinking the function
> would be read eac
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:42 AM, Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> People sometimes read the POSIX standard today and think it is a
> design document. Let me correct that misunderstanding. It is not.
> POSIX is an operating system non-proliferation treaty.
Love it!
jon.
On 8/11/11 10:44 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> It's hard to say without a better idea of the problem. I suspected either
> eval or command substitution because they cause re-entry into the shell
> parser. I don't suspect command substitution because that explicitly turns
> off interactive mode, but ev
` Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
2011-08-08, 13:55(-07), Linda Walsh:
[...]
and both 'exit' and 'return' should return error "ERANGE" if "--posix" is
set, and -1 is given. Iinvalid option doesn't make as much sense, in
this situtation, if it was -k or -m, sure...but in this case, it's a fact
th
Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/10/2011 10:39 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
"It sounded to me like $(( )) would be translated into "$( () )",
turning off arithmetic expansion. Did I read that ___incorrectly__?
Yes, you read it incorrectly.
---
*thankyou*
POSIX is saying that _if_ you want to
33 matches
Mail list logo
