James Carlson wrote: > James Carlson writes: > > Looking at the code, it seems pretty clear that the author expects > > that 'set' doesn't change the return code value, and that the "-ne 0" > > is checking for failures out of /usr/sbin/route itself. > > Ah, shoot, I'm a bonehead. Of course it works fine. This is just a > ksh93 bug and/or misfeature.
AFAIK this is _not_ a ksh93 bug or misfeature, ksh93 behaves as required by the POSIX shell standard (see below). [snip] > In ksh93, it appears that this third case actually returns the > argument count rather than 0 for success. Uhm... are you sure ? ksh93 returns (as required by POSIX, see http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/set.html) |0| for all cases... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
