On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Michael ODonnell <
michael.odonn...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> > the basic echoing of commands that I know is out there some where
> > would make my scripts way more professional. Anyone know that?
>
> Not quite sure what you're referring to but between bash's -x a
> the basic echoing of commands that I know is out there some where
> would make my scripts way more professional. Anyone know that?
Not quite sure what you're referring to but between bash's -x and -v
options you will probably get as much chatty output as you could ever
want. If you remember n
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Kevin D. Clark
wrote:
> Here is the Bash documentation for "set -e":
> I frequently write industrial strength shell scripts, and I nearly
> always put "set -e" at the top. I would humbly suggest for those
> people on this list who are not experts at creating shell
> one of the things that I am enthusiastic about: set -e"
I like that one, too, and I also like the way bash allows
you to trap on error conditions, thusly:
#!/bin/bash
function errHandler() {
echo 'errHandler activated'
}
trap errHandler ERR
echo Ready for firs
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Kevin D. Clark
wrote:
>> You will see each command echoed before it is executed
>
> I have not looked at your scripts, but this reminds me of one of the
> things that I am enthusiastic about: "set -e" in shell scripts.
There are also bash options which will do
Alan Johnson writes:
> At first, my scripting may be a bit confusing because I am very verbose for
> debuggin purposes, and I expect this kind of script is always going to need
> debugging. You will see each command echoed before it is executed in an if
> statement so that it only conitues to th
