GNU bash, version 5.1.8(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
I have attempted to use process substitution in order to feed the
output of a command into two filters, one for handling stdout and the
other for stderr.
Prior to this I was using POSIX sh and named pipes to achieve this but
decided to try
you printf basically to stdout from stderr, ..maybe its that
if you'd change your stderr printf to >&2 maybe works, ..just saying, maybe
or change the order to 2> and then >
..maybe..
peace
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 12:09 earnestly wrote:
> GNU bash, version 5.1.8(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
>
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 11:09:10AM +0100, earnestly wrote:
> What appears to be happening is that the output from standard error is
> being mixed into the function handling standard out, even more
> surprisingly that xtrace output is also being consumed and filtered as
> well.
First, xtrace (set -
On Jul 11 2021, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> You're sending the stderr of generate to a subshell where the stderr()
> function is executed. But the stderr() function writes to stdout.
> Therefore, all of the output from generate is ultimately ending up going
> to the script's stdout, with potentially w
On 7/10/21 6:03 PM, Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev wrote:
is this --branch bash-5.1-testing stilk actual, or should i use devel
No. It's for pre-release versions of bash-5.1. If you want to keep up with
development, use the devel branch.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
thank you
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 20:51 Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 7/10/21 6:03 PM, Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev wrote:
> > is this --branch bash-5.1-testing stilk actual, or should i use devel
>
> No. It's for pre-release versions of bash-5.1. If you want to keep up with
> development, use the devel branch.
