David Walser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
thanks, fixed (sh needs passing -e to echo unlike full bash)
?
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ sh
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ echo \n
\n
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ echo -e \n
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ exit
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ bash
--- Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tv@vador ~ $ /bin/sh -c echo -e 'A\nB'
A
B
tv@vador ~ $ /bin/sh -c echo 'A\nB'
A\nB
[walser@mario walser]$ sh -c echo 'A\nB'
A\nB
[walser@mario walser]$ sh -c echo -e 'A\nB'
A
B
[walser@mario walser]$ bash -c echo 'A\nB'
A\nB
[walser@mario
David Walser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm still not seeing a difference between sh and bash.
well, i'm right in theory whereas you're right in practive :
sysv sh does expand backslash-escaped characters by default (aka
without -e) which simplified bash (aka /bin/sh) should have follow.
but
--- Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Walser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm still not seeing a difference between sh and
bash.
well, i'm right in theory whereas you're right in
practive :
sysv sh does expand backslash-escaped characters by
default (aka
without -e) which
The file contains
#\!/bin/sh\nexec /usr/bin/mcc
And is also now executable
John Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The file contains
#\!/bin/sh\nexec /usr/bin/mcc
And is also now executable
thanks, fixed (sh needs passing -e to echo unlike full bash)
On Friday 20 September 2002 14:12, Thierry Vignaud wrote:
John Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The file contains
#\!/bin/sh\nexec /usr/bin/mcc
And is also now executable
That should ne NOT EXECUTABLE
thanks, fixed (sh needs passing -e to echo unlike full bash)
--- Thierry Vignaud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The file contains
#\!/bin/sh\nexec /usr/bin/mcc
And is also now executable
thanks, fixed (sh needs passing -e to echo unlike
full bash)
?
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$ sh
[djw9202@mccarthy djw9202]$
