On Sat, Aug 10, 2024 at 12:01:58PM +1000, Martin D Kealey wrote:
> If anyone tells you that honorific+given name is the preferred polite way
> to talk to older people, tell them you know someone whose native language
> is English who says that what they're saying is "polite" is actually an
> insult
On Saturday, August 10, 2024, Martin D Kealey
wrote:
> Sorry, that was supposed to be a personal reply off-list.
>
Do you always harass foreigners like that or was it an exception?
--
Oğuz
Sorry, that was supposed to be a personal reply off-list.
On Sat, 10 Aug 2024 at 12:01, Martin D Kealey
wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 at 03:14, alex xmb sw ratchev
> wrote:
>
>> mr chet
>>
>
> I REALLY get annoyed when strangers call me "Mister Martin" or write "Mr
> Martin". I am NOT a child, so
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 at 03:14, alex xmb sw ratchev wrote:
> mr chet
>
I REALLY get annoyed when strangers call me "Mister Martin" or write "Mr
Martin". I am NOT a child, so how DARE they mock me like that.
The short version: Some folk don't care, others don't know any better, but
if you suspect t
On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 10:38 AM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> When I source your script on macOS with the current devel build, I get the
> set of notification messages and termination with a false argument, and an
> infinite loop with a true argument.
So basically, 'wait -n' should be implemented such th
On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 15:20:52 -0400, Zachary Santer wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 2:52 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> >
> > The problem is that our entire understanding of what "wait -n" DOES has
> > been annihilated. We thought it would "trigger" exactly once for every
> > completed background p
On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 2:52 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> The problem is that our entire understanding of what "wait -n" DOES has
> been annihilated. We thought it would "trigger" exactly once for every
> completed background process, regardless of whether they completed
> before or after calling "
On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 13:59:58 -0400, Zachary Santer wrote:
> I don't necessarily understand why someone would call 'wait -n' from
> the interactive shell, so I don't really know what the desired
> behavior would be when they do so. Would be nice if other people want
> to chime in on that point.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2024 at 10:38 AM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> OK, I see what's happening. When the shell is interactive, it notifies
> the user when a background job terminates and prints a message to the
> terminal. That's the series of
>
> [2] Donerandom_sleep
>
> messages you see.
On 8/7/24 5:05 PM, Gioele Barabucci wrote:
Hi,
in bash 5.2.21 the following PS1 assignment
PS1=$'\[\e[0;34;42m\]'$(printf x%.0s {1..111})$'\[\e[0m\]\$ '
should make the prompt a long list of "x", displayed in blue on a red
background. This is in fact the case.
However, if the terminal
On 7/31/24 3:52 PM, Zachary Santer wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 11:40 AM Zachary Santer wrote:
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: msys
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -g -O2
uname output: MSYS_NT-10.0-19045 Zack2021HPPavilion
3.5.3-d8b21
HI Gioele
Typically problems with the prompt are because the \[ and \] are misplaced
or completely missing, but in this case the bug report indicates that they
have indeed been used correctly; so thankyou for checking that first.
The fact that characters are all printed in the same place (over ea
Observed behaviour:
```
$ echo word01 word02 word03 floogle
word01 word02 word03 floogle
$ echo !?word?%
echo word03
word03
$ # I expected to get word01
$ echo $BASH_VERSION
5.2.26(1)-release
```
The bash manual for word designators sounds to me as if word01 should be
selected.
https://www.gnu.or
13 matches
Mail list logo
