Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-31 Thread Sean Bruno
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 20:19 -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:07:55PM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > > over here at big purple, but we do

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-30 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:07:55PM -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > over here at big purple, but we do ... and its a PITA. I'm bisecting to > find out what is going

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-28 Thread Christian Weisgerber
Sean Bruno wrote: > > > VARIABLE="$(uname)" > > > bash: command substitution: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token > > > `)' > > > bash: command substitution: line 3: `uname)"' > > > > > At least that was easy. It's patch level 12. That's just the first patch that happens to touch parse.

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-25 Thread Jason Hellenthal
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 07:44:39AM +0200, Trond Endrest?l wrote: > On Thu, 24 May 2012 13:07-0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > > over here at big purple, but w

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-24 Thread Trond Endrestøl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, 24 May 2012 13:07-0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > over here at big purple, but we do ... and its a PITA. I'm

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-24 Thread Sean Bruno
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:14 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:07 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > > over here at big purple, but we do ... an

Re: bash 4.2 patchlevel 28

2012-05-24 Thread Sean Bruno
On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:07 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > Noted that the following syntax is broken somewhere between 4.2 > patchlevel 10 and 28. I'm sure its because we shouldn't be doing that > over here at big purple, but we do ... and its a PITA. I'm bisecting to > find out what is going on. >