Hi Piotr,
Actually when process com is not needed, "com.sh" will not be launched instead
of commenting one line.
I have never tried that. From the coredump log of 4.3, seems it crashed before
line 187. (crashed at 114).
Thank you.
-Original Message-
From: Piotr Grzybowski [mailto:narsil
I found this some time ago, but didn't report it because I couldn't come up
with a patch:
dualbus@hp ~ % for sh in bash mksh zsh ksh93 dash; do $sh -c
't=${KSH_VERSION+typeset}; f() { x=3; ${t:-local} x; echo $x; }; [ "$(f)" =
"$(x=4 f)" ]'; echo $sh $?; done
bash 1
mksh 0
zsh 0
ksh93 0
dash 0
On 2015-10-15 16:23, Chet Ramey wrote:
The first beta release of bash-4.4 is now available with the URL
ftp://ftp.cwru.edu/pub/bash/bash-4.4-beta.tar.gz
First attempt at build on AIX
configure warns that bison is not available - good.
configure finishes - good
make fails immediately becaus
do I understand correctly, that when you comment the line 187 the
issue is not existent?
cheers,
pg
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Kai Wang X wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thank you all!
>
> The issue happens since we added a new process launched by a bash script.
> Before that, no "sbrk issues" wer
On 10/22/15 8:13 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
>
> Oleg Popov wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:01:06AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
>>> [cut]
>>> I.e. test output was:
>>> Case 2 got/Expected:
>>> "222"
>>> "1\ 222\ .3\ .4"
>>> [cut]
>>
>> You didn't initialize the array. By the time you do "parts[1]
Oleg Popov wrote:
$(...) is a subshell. Variables cannot be passed back from a subshell,
no matter how and where they are declared.
---
Um... oh.. in testor, still calling that way. I
missed that.
This is even more annoying for passing back results
than I thought. Grrr.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:01:06AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> [cut]
> I.e. test output was:
> Case 2 got/Expected:
> "222"
> "1\ 222\ .3\ .4"
> [cut]
You didn't initialize the array. By the time you do "parts[1]=222" it's
still empty. And in your previous message you tried to initialize it in
a
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 05:13:45AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> Oleg Popov wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:01:06AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> >> [cut]
> >> I.e. test output was:
> >> Case 2 got/Expected:
> >> "222"
> >> "1\ 222\ .3\ .4"
> >> [cut]
> >
> > You didn't initialize the array. By
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 02:39:43AM +, Kai Wang X wrote:
> The process named "com" launched by script command "com.sh start". Pls refer
> to the attached files. It looks easy, doesn't it?
It looks like a horrible mish-mash of legacy Bourne shell syntax,
edited later by another person using cer
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 07:19:30PM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
> Not to mention your statement doesn't work:
My code worked. I tested it. If you take working code and mangle it
according to your incredibly bizarre notions of how bash code should
look, and it doesn't work, then the problem is on yo
Oleg Popov wrote:
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 03:01:06AM -0700, Linda Walsh wrote:
[cut]
I.e. test output was:
Case 2 got/Expected:
"222"
"1\ 222\ .3\ .4"
[cut]
You didn't initialize the array. By the time you do "parts[1]=222" it's
still empty. And in your previous message you tried to initial
Greg Wooledge wrote:
Also I think you are completely misrepresenting the dynamic variable
scope system that bash uses. Variables are not just global or local.
There's an entire stack of them. When you reference a
variable (let's say i) inside a function, bash searches up
through the call
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
> But only as a pointer to something one can do I/O on.
> You can't set any file attributes or metadata on "pipe:[]" It's not a
> real file somewhere.
>
Yes, it's not a regular file, but it not the less true that <( ) gives you
a
13 matches
Mail list logo
