Re: Should this be this way?

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: > My login shell is /bin/bash (i.e. not /bin/sh); SHELL=/bin/bash as well. > Typing 'which bash' gives /bin/bash, and whence bash: bash is /bin/bash. > > I had the foll0wing script which acts differently based on > whether or not it has a #!/bin/

Re: Should this be this way?

Chris Down wrote: > On 2013-02-25 18:27, Linda Walsh wrote: >> I mentioned that everything in my ENV and usage pointed at /bin/bash. > > You gave $SHELL, which is not really relevant (it doesn't necessarily > reference > your login shell, or your current shell either). I also gave

Re: Should this be this way?

On 2013-02-25 18:27, Linda Walsh wrote: > I mentioned that everything in my ENV and usage pointed at /bin/bash. You gave $SHELL, which is not really relevant (it doesn't necessarily reference your login shell, or your current shell either). > Why would I do that, and then use 'sh script'? > > Wou

Re: gnu parallel in the bash manual

Am 26.02.2013 03:36, schrieb Linda Walsh: > > Chet Ramey wrote: >> On 2/25/13 8:07 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: >>> Chet Ramey wrote: On 2/16/13 3:50 AM, Pierre Gaston wrote: > I don't quite see the point of having gnu parallel discussed in the > bash reference manual. I was asked to ad

Re: gnu parallel in the bash manual

Chet Ramey wrote: > On 2/25/13 8:07 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: >> Chet Ramey wrote: >>> On 2/16/13 3:50 AM, Pierre Gaston wrote: I don't quite see the point of having gnu parallel discussed in the bash reference manual. >>> I was asked to add that in May, 2010 by Ole Tange and Richard Stall

Re: Should this be this way?

DJ Mills wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Linda Walsh > wrote: > > You didn't answer the question... how did you call the script? > > ''sh script'' ? --- I typed the script name interactively on the command line -- the way I thought most people ran scripts. I m

Re: Should this be this way?

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: > Sorry, forgot: > > bash --version > GNU bash, version 4.2.10(1)-release (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) > > uname -a > Linux Ishtar 3.7.6-Isht-Van #4 SMP PREEMPT Thu Feb 7 01:34:39 PST 2013 > x86_64 > x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux > --- > I just can see why

Re: Should this be this way?

Sorry, forgot: > bash --version GNU bash, version 4.2.10(1)-release (x86_64-suse-linux-gnu) > uname -a Linux Ishtar 3.7.6-Isht-Van #4 SMP PREEMPT Thu Feb 7 01:34:39 PST 2013 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux --- I just can see why it should execute differently... very weird.

Re: Should this be this way?

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: > My login shell is /bin/bash (i.e. not /bin/sh); SHELL=/bin/bash as well. > Typing 'which bash' gives /bin/bash, and whence bash: bash is /bin/bash. > > I had the foll0wing script which acts differently based on > whether or not it has a #!/bin

Re: gnu parallel in the bash manual

Chet Ramey wrote: > On 2/16/13 3:50 AM, Pierre Gaston wrote: >> I don't quite see the point of having gnu parallel discussed in the >> bash reference manual. > I was asked to add that in May, 2010 by Ole Tange and Richard Stallman. Maybe now that it was done, it can be removed? Or did they as

Should this be this way?

My login shell is /bin/bash (i.e. not /bin/sh); SHELL=/bin/bash as well. Typing 'which bash' gives /bin/bash, and whence bash: bash is /bin/bash. I had the foll0wing script which acts differently based on whether or not it has a #!/bin/bash at the top: (i.e., as it is displayed below, it fails; on

"RE:Re: \"RE:Re: \\\"The \\\\\\\". ~/.bash_aliases\\\\\\\" on bashrc don't load ""file\\\"\""

Hi Chris, Yes, I use temporally my ISP, wanad... and don't have too much control over. In few time i have my servers up and running again, and full control. Greetings, Jose Luis PS: Hope more luck now in format. ---Mensaje original--- Don't worry about it. As an aside, y

"RE:Re: \"The \\\". ~/.bash_aliases\\\" on bashrc don't load file\""

Hi Chris, The output is: es un alias de `cd ~' ( . is an alias of "cd ~") My apologies. Some days ago I tested aliases to best use and tested this, but not deleted. On restarting system I forgot completely. Sorry. >From now I use first, type "alias to use". Corrected the mistake, the output

Re: cd -e returns syntax error

Hey, On 2013-02-24 00:54, Dan Douglas wrote: > On Sunday, February 24, 2013 02:43:03 PM Chris Down wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Unless I'm misunderstanding how it should work, `cd -P -e' does not work as > > specified by the documentation. From `help cd': > > Yep, see: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/h

Re: "RE:Re: \"The \\\". ~/.bash_aliases\\\" on bashrc don't load file\""

On 2013-02-26 01:17, Uroz Gonzalez, Jose Luis wrote: > Hi Chris, > > The output is: > > es un alias de `cd ~' ( . is an alias of "cd ~") > > My apologies. > > Some days ago I tested aliases to best use and tested this, but not deleted. > On restarting system I forgot completely. Sorry. > > From no

Re: "The \". ~/.bash_aliases\" on bashrc don't load file"

On 2013-02-25 21:27, Uroz Gonzalez, Jose Luis 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'

"The \". ~/.bash_aliases\" on bashrc don't load file"

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/share/locale' -DPACKAGE='ba

Re: bash crash processing b=b+1 after array read

On 2/24/13 11:59 PM, phil colbourn wrote: > Bash Version: 4.2 > Patch Level: 37 > Release Status: release > > Description: > > Within (( )), 'b=b+1' will crash bash with a segment fault if it follows an > array read such as 'a=X[b]'. Thanks for the report and the test case. This was reported p