The config.h.in file in the standalone readline distribution is missing
a lot of templates. It should really be generated by autoheader.
--- readline-6.3/config.h.in.~1~2012-01-18 16:22:13.0 +0100
+++ readline-6.3/config.h.in2015-04-19 19:39:13.215290092 +0200
@@ -6,6 +6,14 @@
On 4/17/15 2:43 PM, Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
> In the BSDs, doing a read on a directory doesn't return a negative value.
Thanks for the investigation and report.
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrat
On 4/17/15 6:45 PM, isabella parakiss wrote:
> This seems the way to go, but I'm not sure I understand why:
>
> $ declare -A arr=([a]=b)
> $ [[ -v arr['$var'] ]]; echo $?
> 1
> $ declare -A arr=(['*']=x)
> $ [[ -v arr['$var'] ]]; echo $?
> 0
>
>
> What's happening?
Well, as I said before, `*'
On 4/17/15 6:27 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
>
> Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
>> Well, if your scripts are so simple, why use local functions at all?
> ---
> Cleanliness, Hygiene...
Please, let's not have this argument again. I think you're all using the
term `local function' to mean diff
On 4/19/15 2:00 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> The config.h.in file in the standalone readline distribution is missing
> a lot of templates. It should really be generated by autoheader.
>
> --- readline-6.3/config.h.in.~1~ 2012-01-18 16:22:13.0 +0100
> +++ readline-6.3/config.h.in 2015
On 4/17/15 4:55 PM, John Fremlin wrote:
> Did some benchmarks, for the while true; do (:) & (:); done simple example
> this goes from 215 to 313 iterations/s, and changes sys+user CPU from 152%
> to 45%
>
> Any long running bash script will tend to exhibit this issue --
I disagree that `any' long
On 4/17/15 2:03 PM, Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
> 0001-Fix-spacing-issues-in-tests-to-make-it-easier-to-tra.patch
> 0002-Fix-unclosed-double-quote.patch
> 0004-Fix-declare-regression.patch
> 0003-Remove-compiler-warnings.-Does-that-really-need-to-b.patch
> 0005-Make-the-compiler-happy-remove
Hi Chet,
>> Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
>>> Well, if your scripts are so simple, why use local functions at all?
>> ---
>> Cleanliness, Hygiene...
>
> Please, let's not have this argument again. I think you're all using the
> term `local function' to mean different things.
>
> You seem
On 4/20/15, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 4/17/15 6:45 PM, isabella parakiss wrote:
>
>> This seems the way to go, but I'm not sure I understand why:
>>
>> $ declare -A arr=([a]=b)
>> $ [[ -v arr['$var'] ]]; echo $?
>> 1
>> $ declare -A arr=(['*']=x)
>> $ [[ -v arr['$var'] ]]; echo $?
>> 0
>>
>>
>> What'
