On 2/28/18 5:31 AM, Lakshman Garlapati wrote:
> The following snippet is working fine in x86 processor machine not working
> in arm processor machine from bash 4.3 version onwards.
>
> test.sh
> =
> #!/bin/bash
> rm out.txt
> function abc() {
> if [ 2 -eq 1 ]; then
> echo "TRUE"
> els
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/28/18 5:31 AM, Lakshman Garlapati wrote:
>
> > The following snippet is working fine in x86 processor machine not
> working
> > in arm processor machine from bash 4.3 version onwards.
> >
> > test.sh
> > =
> > #!/bin/bash
> > rm out.tx
Hi all,
I am facing problem in bash 4.4 . In a function if first line is ‘If
condition‘ and the function is called in background then the bash does not
evaluate it properly
Following are the cross compiled machine details.
MACHINE="arm"
OS="linux-gnueabi"
CC="arm-cortex_a9_v004-linux-gnueabi-gcc
This behavior is different in zsh and bash, and maybe bash behavior is a
bug.
# Test case
touch 1 2 3
cat > script.sh <
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 03:25:21AM -0500, William Entriken wrote:
> from=1
> to=3
> ls {$from..$to}
> Bash fails the chained substitution with:
>
> ls: {1..3}: No such file or directory
This is simply not a feature that bash implements. Bash does the
expansions in the opposite order (brace expa
On 2/28/18 3:25 AM, William Entriken wrote:
> This behavior is different in zsh and bash, and maybe bash behavior is a
> bug.
>
> # Test case
>
> touch 1 2 3
> cat > script.sh < from=1
> to=3
> ls {$from..$to}
> EOL
> chmod a+x script.sh
>
> bash ./script.sh
>
> zsh ./script.sh
>
> # Expected
On 2/27/18 3:49 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Tue, 27 Feb 2018 11:18:40 -0500
> From:Chet Ramey
> Message-ID: <21679c48-4064-5683-2d5f-91bfb7668...@case.edu>
>
> | It doesn't. Run the following script:
>
> OK, that looks good. But now I am very confused.
These are
Thank you for explaining this fine point.
I have found a way to use double expansion, and of course this is not safe
in all contexts:
from=1;to=3;eval echo {$from..$to}
Regards,
Will
William Entriken
+1 267-738-4201
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/28/18 3:25
I wrote a minimal, detailed, replicable and markdowned description of the
problem in the following link and I report this after days of testing and
not "on the fly":
https://serverfault.com/questions/898964/copy-paste-into-digitalocean-modified-ubuntu-bash-includes-dots-instead-tabulati
Thanks fo
I'm not sure if it deals only with Ubuntu-Bash.
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 7:41 PM, Benqzq wrote:
> I wrote a minimal, detailed, replicable and markdowned description of the
> problem in the following link and I report this after days of testing and
> not "on the fly":
>
> https://serverfault.com/q
Date:Wed, 28 Feb 2018 10:27:23 -0500
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID:
| These are two different cases -- same context vs. a previous context. Your
| example is not the same as the original poster's.
OK, though I am not sure why that should make a difference.
| Thi
I think most people will agree that unset is extremely surprising,
though they may point to different parts of it as the source of their
surprise.
8 years after Freddy Vulto's initial investigations, there are many
things I still don't understand. For example, consider this code
straight from his
On 2/28/18 3:00 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Does unset create some kind of "placeholder" in the current function
> (but not in a caller)?
Yes, that's what I said. In the current scope, unset arranges for the
variable to appear unset. In a previous scope, unset just removes the
variable, which unco
seems like it would be helpful to explain this behavior more clearly in the
man page.
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 12:14 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/28/18 3:00 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> > Does unset create some kind of "placeholder" in the current function
> > (but not in a caller)?
>
> Yes, t
Date:Wed, 28 Feb 2018 09:03:45 -0500
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID: <46653602-7efa-9e3c-b477-4d22118fd...@case.edu>
I didn't see the proginal of this message either, but ...
| On 2/28/18 5:31 AM, Lakshman Garlapati wrote:
|
| > The following snippet is working fin
Date:Wed, 28 Feb 2018 15:14:58 -0500
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID:
| Yes, that's what I said. In the current scope, unset arranges for the
| variable to appear unset. In a previous scope, unset just removes the
| variable, which uncovers an instance of the variab
16 matches
Mail list logo
