Re: bash scripts and files

2008-01-09 Thread Bob McGowan
michael wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 13:26 +0100, Dan H wrote: On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:03:07 + michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: .bashrc and .bash_profile are different. They are only reasonably invoked by a bash shell, so it is safe to assume they are written using bash syntax. They are,

Re: bash scripts and files

2008-01-09 Thread michael
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 13:26 +0100, Dan H wrote: > On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:03:07 + > michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > .bashrc and .bash_profile are different. They are only reasonably > > > invoked by a bash shell, so it is safe to assume they are written > > > using bash syntax. They

Re: bash scripts and files

2008-01-09 Thread Dan H
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:03:07 + michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > .bashrc and .bash_profile are different. They are only reasonably > > invoked by a bash shell, so it is safe to assume they are written > > using bash syntax. They are, after all, configuration files for > > bash, so what ot

Re: bash scripts and files

2008-01-09 Thread michael
On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 18:51 +, Tyler Smith wrote: > On 2007-12-31, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Thanks, probably the previous chapter ("she-bang") was of more use > > but a useful ref. However, I'm still trying to understand why it's > > not usual to have a she-bang for the .b

Re: bash scripts and files

2007-12-31 Thread Tyler Smith
On 2007-12-31, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks, probably the previous chapter ("she-bang") was of more use > but a useful ref. However, I'm still trying to understand why it's > not usual to have a she-bang for the .bash_profile and .bashrc files. > That documentation reads as i

Re: bash scripts and files

2007-12-31 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/31/07 05:07, michael wrote: > > On 30 Dec 2007, at 18:11, Gerard Robin wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 05:17:43PM +, michael wrote: >>> From: michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: debian us

Re: bash scripts and files

2007-12-31 Thread michael
On 30 Dec 2007, at 18:11, Gerard Robin wrote: On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 05:17:43PM +, michael wrote: From: michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian user Subject: bash scripts and files X-Spam-Virus: No X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on liszt.debian.org X-Spam

Re: bash scripts and files

2007-12-30 Thread Gerard Robin
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 05:17:43PM +, michael wrote: From: michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: debian user Subject: bash scripts and files X-Spam-Virus: No X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on liszt.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=4.0

Re: bash scripts and files

2007-12-30 Thread Iñigo Tejedor Arrondo
2007/12/30, michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Folks, can somebody point me to an authorative reference that > explains when one needs to put, eg, > #!/bin/bash > as the first line of a script and whether or not it's required/ > surplus/ignored for bash specific files such as .bashrc > and .bash_prof

bash scripts and files

2007-12-30 Thread michael
Folks, can somebody point me to an authorative reference that explains when one needs to put, eg, #!/bin/bash as the first line of a script and whether or not it's required/ surplus/ignored for bash specific files such as .bashrc and .bash_profile many thanks but couldn't find it quickly u