In the documentation for set -e, the Bash manual says that errexit is
suspended in all but the last command of a pipeline:
The shell does not exit if the command that fails is part of
[...] any command in a pipeline but the last
The documentation also of course says that errexit susp
On 1/10/23 9:36 PM, Quinn Grier wrote:
In the documentation for set -e, the Bash manual says that errexit is
suspended in all but the last command of a pipeline:
The shell does not exit if the command that fails is part of
[...] any command in a pipeline but the last
That's not w
On 2023-01-11 06:44, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 1/10/23 9:36 PM, Quinn Grier wrote:
In the documentation for set -e, the Bash manual says that errexit is
suspended in all but the last command of a pipeline:
The shell does not exit if the command that fails is part of
[...] any command
On 1/11/23 4:04 PM, Quinn Grier wrote:
On 2023-01-11 06:44, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 1/10/23 9:36 PM, Quinn Grier wrote:
In the documentation for set -e, the Bash manual says that errexit is
suspended in all but the last command of a pipeline:
The shell does not exit if the command that fa
On 2023-01-11 13:20, Chet Ramey wrote:
They are not all contexts where set -e is ignored. There is a distinction
between the effect of -e being ignored and the shell not exiting when a
command fails.
If you don't like the bash manual page wording, here's what POSIX says:
"1.The failure of a
What should be the real issue here is that the -e option is mostly a VERY
poor idea to ever use, unless you really know how it works, and only people
who are either shell implementors (and perhaps not even all of them) and
very long time shell users who have been bitten by attempts to use -e, tend
