On 13 Apr 2016 11:23, Anis ELLEUCH wrote:
> I would like to ask if it is possible to disable expanding asterisk when it
> selects all entries ?
>
> `$ rm * .jpg` with a mistaken space between asterisk and .jpg will delete
> everything in your home directory or in the entire disk.
>
> In my opinio
Anis ELLEUCH wrote:
> I would like to ask if it is possible to disable expanding asterisk when it
> selects all entries ?
You ask if it is possible and the answer is no it is not possible.
Because the shell expands the "*" before it passes the result as
arguments to the rm command. The rm command
On 4/13/16 9:34 AM, Pierre Gaston wrote:
> For me the value is in 1) not hard coding the number and 2) being able to
> use more explicit names (eg "logfile" rather than "3"), nothing more.
If you limit the effects to those two, it's not a compelling feature to
add. In practice, the first is not
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 03:28:02PM +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> 2016-04-13 08:55:16 -0400, Greg Wooledge:
> [...]
> > > And if you want to keep eventual spurious characters after the
> > > last NL character in the file:
> > >
> > > while IFS= read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < tes
2016-04-13 08:55:16 -0400, Greg Wooledge:
[...]
> > And if you want to keep eventual spurious characters after the
> > last NL character in the file:
> >
> > while IFS= read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < test.txt
> > [ -z "$line" ] || printf %s "$line"
>
> Another way to write that is
> On 4/13/16 1:54 AM, George Caswell wrote:
> > Personally, I don't think it makes sense for a redirection on a command to
> > persist beyond the scope of that command. A redirection with a
> > dynamically-assigned fd is basically equivalent to a redirection to a
> > numbered fd.
>
> Then why have
Hello everybody,
I would like to ask if it is possible to disable expanding asterisk when it
selects all entries ?
`$ rm * .jpg` with a mistaken space between asterisk and .jpg will delete
everything in your home directory or in the entire disk.
In my opinion, when the user asks to select "every
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 4/13/16 1:54 AM, George Caswell wrote:
>
> > Personally, I don't think it makes sense for a redirection on a command
> to
> > persist beyond the scope of that command. A redirection with a
> > dynamically-assigned fd is basically equivalent
On 4/13/16 1:54 AM, George Caswell wrote:
> Personally, I don't think it makes sense for a redirection on a command to
> persist beyond the scope of that command. A redirection with a
> dynamically-assigned fd is basically equivalent to a redirection to a
> numbered fd.
Then why have it? There's
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 01:43:42PM +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> 2016-04-13 08:10:15 +0200, Geir Hauge:
> [...]
> > while read -r line; do echo "$line"; done < test.txt
> >
> > though printf should be preferred over echo:
> >
> > while read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < te
On 4/12/16 9:49 PM, Seiichi Ishitsuka wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I found memory leak in case of using "HISTCONTOL=erasedups" in bash-4.2.
Thanks for the report. This will be fixed in the next release of bash.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa
2016-04-13 08:10:15 +0200, Geir Hauge:
[...]
> while read -r line; do echo "$line"; done < test.txt
>
> though printf should be preferred over echo:
>
> while read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < test.txt
[...]
Actually, you also need to empty $IFS
while IFS= read -r line; do
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 06:49:51AM -0500, John McKown wrote:
> ???Ah. Thanks. I only use BASH and the GNU infrastructure, so I have never
> run into that problem. I think I'll change my habits, just in case I run
> across a system which doesn't have it (especially in my scripts)
Every implementati
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Pierre Gaston
wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:34 PM, John McKown > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Geir Hauge wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>> though printf should be preferred over echo:
>>>
>>> while read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; d
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 2:34 PM, John McKown
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Geir Hauge wrote:
>
> ...
>
>
>> though printf should be preferred over echo:
>>
>> while read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < test.txt
>>
>
> I've never read about using printf in preference t
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Geir Hauge wrote:
...
> though printf should be preferred over echo:
>
> while read -r line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done < test.txt
>
I've never read about using printf in preference to echo. Why is that? I
have used it myself in special cases, such a
> On 1/27/16 1:18 PM, Mathieu Patenaude wrote:
> >
> > When using "named" file descriptors inside a function, the file descriptors
> > are not automatically un-linked when the function returns, but when using
> > regular "numbered" file descriptors they are automatically "destroyed".
>
> Yes. Th
17 matches
Mail list logo
