Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It's going to print one line for each line of code that gets executed. > Which will be 8 plus 3 * the number of lines read from PROC. How many > do you expect that to be? No variable substitutions will be performed
Around 2000. But I've confused things a bit here. Looking at that output is actually only tangentially related to debug output. It would be more for a trial check that things are getting tarred as planned. More important is the actual workings of the script. There, I think the -t would be more usefull although still quite a lot less so than sh -x. > No-one does what you want by using the debugger trace mode; they do it > by explicitly printing a line intended to be logging information. What a shame.. One can add a `sh -x' to `/path/script' without even editing the actual script, to see quite a lot about how it works. Or what I do is set `PS4='$LINENO: ';export PS4' in my shell init, then `bash -x /path/script' to get the line numbers where stuff actually occurs. I would have thought perl would have something very similar. But I guess its a case of perl being considerably more powerfull and involved so the output of a `sh -x' type thing would be too extensive to be very usefull, given the ways perl is likely to be used. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
