[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Baker) writes:
> And your suggestion of
>
> (cd /very/long/path; cp foo bar baz)
To be safe, this should be
(cd /very/long/path && cp foo bar baz)
--
Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Santiago Vila Doncel) writes:
> Yes, bash is essential because we always *need* a POSIX shell. But GNU
> bash provides *two* of them: /bin/sh and /bin/bash. Only /bin/sh should
> be essential.
However, dangling symlinks are not terribly
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Santiago Vila Doncel:
> > bash is currently essential because there is no other POSIX
> > shell. Point.
>
> No, that is not the (only) reason why bash is essential. bash is also
> essential because it provides a fixed useful set of facilities for
> people to write init.d scri
I agree with Ricardas Cepas.
Bob
> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 97 16:02 GMT
> From: Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Ricardas Cepas thinks that we should map <-- to ASCII BS and `Delete'
> to ASCII DEL. Is there anyone else who agrees with him ? If not then
> I think we can safely go with my pro
Ricardas Cepas thinks that we should map <-- to ASCII BS and `Delete'
to ASCII DEL. Is there anyone else who agrees with him ? If not then
I think we can safely go with my proposal, as it has rough consensus.
If there is then I need to argue with him and to convince people.
Ian.
Klee points out:
> I definitely agree regarding 'start|stop|restart'. However, I believe
> that 'reload' should take action only if properly supported by the
> system in question. When I use the 'reload' argument, it's for the
> specific purpose of making the system reload it's configuration file
Santiago Vila Doncel:
> bash is currently essential because there is no other POSIX
> shell. Point.
No, that is not the (only) reason why bash is essential. bash is also
essential because it provides a fixed useful set of facilities for
people to write init.d scripts, preinst scripts, &c., - ie,
Fabrizio Polacco suggests accelerating my plan for the transition to
FHS (insofar as we choose to go with it).
I think this is a bad idea because it will involve changing many
things at once. It is better to have a plan that will be more robust
at any stage and where we get the chance to fix bugs
--- Begin Message ---
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ricardas Cepas) writes:
>> Linux and other good operating systems already use DEL for backspace.
>
> AFAIK FreeBSD uses Del for delete and BS for backspace.
> And surely this doesn't make it bad OS. The same
The subject is widely covered in updated kbd.FAQ (kbd 0.95).
On Thu Nov 20 13:04:00 1997 +
Ian Jackson wrote:
...
> Linux and other good operating systems already use DEL for backspace.
...
AFAIK FreeBSD uses Del for delete and BS for backspace.
And surely this doesn't make
10 matches
Mail list logo
