Bob Proulx a écrit :
> > Tamlyn1978 wrote:
>> >> Is there a way to make 'cat' ignore the comments or is there a better
>> >> alternative to cat in this case?
> >
> > Note that if 'cat' didn't exactly reproduce the contents of input on
> > the output I would consider that a grave bug.
Well... GNU
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i586
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc -I/usr/src/packages/BUILD/bash-4.0
-L/usr/src/packages/BUILD/bash-4.0/../readline-6.0
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i586'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYP
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:06 PM, wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: i586
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc -I/usr/src/packages/BUILD/bash-4.0
> -L/usr/src/packages/BUILD/bash-4.0/../readline-6.0
> Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTT
On Friday 09 October 2009, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> > Repeat-By:
> >printf '%s\n%s\n' foo bar | while read NAME;
> >echo NAME=$NAME
> >do
> >echo blah
> >done
>
> Not sure what is the incorrect syntax, and it seems normal that it goes
> into an infinite lo
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Dave B wrote:
> On Friday 09 October 2009, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>
> > > Repeat-By:
> > >printf '%s\n%s\n' foo bar | while read NAME;
> > >echo NAME=$NAME
> > >do
> > >echo blah
> > >done
> >
> > Not sure what is the incor
On Friday 09 October 2009, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> > Well, it seems to me (and as stated in the bug report) that a "do" should
> > follow the "while read NAME;".
>
> the while syntax is like this:
> "while list; do list; done"
> and the manual says "A sequence of one or more newlines may appear in
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:46:16AM +0100, Dave B wrote:
> On Friday 09 October 2009, Pierre Gaston wrote:
>
> Uhm, on a more accurate reading you're probably right. The POSIX syntax for
> while is
>
> while compound-list-1 do
> compound-list-2
> done
>
> And "read NAME; echo NAME=$NAME" is
Marc Herbert wrote:
> Bob Proulx a écrit :
> > > Note that if 'cat' didn't exactly reproduce the contents of input on
> > > the output I would consider that a grave bug.
>
> Well... GNU cat has a number of options, and almost every single one is
> munging the output :-)
And they aren't desirabl
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i686
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/local/share/locale' -DPACKA
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i686
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/local/share/locale' -DPACKA
n...@s-z.org wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: i686
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
> -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
> -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR
n...@s-z.org wrote:
> Bash Version: 4.0
> Patch Level: 33
> Release Status: release
>
> [apologies if this is a duplicate; the first copy may have been sent with
> a bad From: address]
>
> Description:
> "${@:0:n}" should expand to $0 followed by n-1 positional parameters,
> but act
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i686
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686'
-DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu'
-DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/local/share/locale' -DPACKA
13 matches
Mail list logo