Re: [9fans] Scripts in 9pm

[Ethan Gardener]

And then I found it's barely reasonable to run Windows batch files from 9pm rc. 
 Despite rc using Windows path syntax, changes to $path made in rc don't get 
propagated to the batch file.  Also, rc doesn't find batch files in the path.  

*And* I can't remember why I started trying to use 9pm!  I do like the black 
and white Sam, but the lack of support for even left and right arrow keys is 
not fun at all.  After using Acme SAC for a while, I've found myself trying to 
use up and down arrows too.  I'm going soft.

Re: [9fans] #! scripts

[lucio]

> See exec(2):
>   For a file beginning #!, the arguments passed to the program
>   (/bin/rc in the example above) will be the name of the file
>   being executed, any arguments on the #! line, the name of
>   the file again, and finally the second and subsequent argu-
>   ments given to the original exec call.  The result honors
>   the two conventions of a program accepting as argument a
>   file to be interpreted and argv[0] naming the file being
>   executed.

I always seem to expect a subtly different behaviour from what I get.
In this case, I note now that NetBSD behaves exactly the same, but I
only considered trying it out after you've made me read that passage
for the sixteenth time.  I guess I always read in it what I was hoping
to find.

I guess that means I have nothing to fix.  Not only, but any
extensions I was hoping for are shown to be utterly impractical :-(

Let me go back to ELF...

++L

Re: [9fans] #! scripts

[Richard Miller]

See exec(2):
  For a file beginning #!, the arguments passed to the program
  (/bin/rc in the example above) will be the name of the file
  being executed, any arguments on the #! line, the name of
  the file again, and finally the second and subsequent argu-
  ments given to the original exec call.  The result honors
  the two conventions of a program accepting as argument a
  file to be interpreted and argv[0] naming the file being
  executed.