Re: feature request: file_not_found_handle()

On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 01:46:16PM +0200, Andreas Gregor Frank wrote: > same reason for me: some object-oriented shell ( > http://oobash.sourceforge.net/) We're both running commands in the form 'object.method ...', and it works very naturally on the shell using the command-not-found hook. The pr

Re: feature request: file_not_found_handle()

On 8/14/13 7:44 AM, Andreas Gregor Frank wrote: > Hi, > > i think a file_not_found_handle() or a modified command_not_found_handle(), > that does not need an unsuccessful PATH search to be triggered, would be > useful and consistent. The original rationale for command_not_found_handle is that the

Re: autocomplete error doesn't look to be in bash-complete so I'm reporting it here.

On 8/16/13 5:28 AM, dethrop...@web.de wrote: > Bash Version: 4.2 > Patch Level: 25 > Release Status: release > > Description: > autocomplete error doesn't look to be in bash-complete so I'm reporting > it here. > > Repeat-By: > touch '>(pygmentize -l text -f html )' > rm >[Press tab]

Aw: Re: autocomplete error doesn't look to be in bash-complete so I'm reporting it here.

I got the file by running some code using procees substitution with set +o posix. I don't think the drectory was empty but what you say make sense and I didn't think to checkt it at the time. Thanks JOhn Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. August 2013 um 20:42 Uhr Von: "Chet Ramey"

Re: feature request: file_not_found_handle()

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 02:35:49PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 8/14/13 7:44 AM, Andreas Gregor Frank wrote: > > Hi, > > > > i think a file_not_found_handle() or a modified command_not_found_handle(), > > that does not need an unsuccessful PATH search to be triggered, would be > > useful and cons

child_pid of background process? (not in manpage?)

I don't find the variable for the process ID of the last started background process documented in the bash manpage... Am I just missing it, or did it get left out by accident or where did it go? ($!)

Re: feature request: file_not_found_handle()

Chet Ramey wrote: On 8/14/13 7:44 AM, Andreas Gregor Frank wrote: Hi, i think a file_not_found_handle() or a modified command_not_found_handle(), that does not need an unsuccessful PATH search to be triggered, would be useful and consistent. The original rationale for command_not_found_hand

i++ cause bad return code when result is 1

% uname -a Linux dph1d1ods13 2.6.32-279.2.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jul 5 21:08:58 EDT 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux % bash --version GNU bash, version 4.1.2(1)-release (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) The ((i++)) fails only when the result is 1. When the result is 0 or 2, it do

failed grep should cause subshell to exit

### should never see done ** ** % uname -a Linux x 2.6.32-279.2.1.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Jul 5 21:08:58 EDT 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux % bash --version GNU bash, version 4.1.2(1)-release (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) ( set -ex ** ** echo hello >x grep hello x

Re: i++ cause bad return code when result is 1

On 2013-08-18 16:57, David Lehmann wrote: > The ((i++)) fails only when the result is 1. When the result is 0 or 2, it > does not fail. This is a problem when 'set -e'. This is normal and expected. If the value returned in an (( expression is zero, then the exit code is 1. Since you're using a p

Re: child_pid of background process? (not in manpage?)

On 2013-08-18 17:46, Linda Walsh wrote: > I don't find the variable for the process ID of the > last started background process documented in the bash manpage... > > Am I just missing it, or did it get left out by accident or > where did it go? First of all, it would help if you gave your version.

Re: feature request: file_not_found_handle()

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 06:30:47PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote: > > Chet Ramey wrote: > >On 8/14/13 7:44 AM, Andreas Gregor Frank wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>i think a file_not_found_handle() or a modified command_not_found_handle(), > >>that does not need an unsuccessful PATH search to be triggered, wou