On 2019-06-05, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote:
> When running under set -e, why does
> eval false || echo ok
> terminate the script with the execution of eval?
I think that's a bug.
> then why does the below behave differently?
> eval ! true || echo ok
That's actually the documented,
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 08:05:48PM +0200, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote:
> When running under set -e, why does
>
> eval false || echo ok
Just to clarify:
OpenBSD's sh(1) and ksh(1) make it impossible to run code like
set -e
if eval "$string"; then
echo ok
else
echo not ok
fi
whe
When running under set -e, why does
eval false || echo ok
terminate the script with the execution of eval? As far as I know, the
OpenBSD sh(1) and ksh(1) shells are the only ones doing that.
If we take termination of the script as a given in the above scenario
(even if it feel a bit odd sin
On 7/17/07, Paul de Weerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 11:42:14AM -0400, Eric Furman wrote:
| > The description of [[ ]] is missing from sh(1) though, hence my
| > statement "which, I believe, is only a difference in documentation".
|
This difference is only in the document
On 2007/07/17 19:37, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 11:42:14AM -0400, Eric Furman said that
> > [[ is not listed in sh(1) because this construct doesn't exist in sh(1).
> > There is a difference in the [[ construct in ksh. Read man ksh(1).
>
> righ
hmm, on Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 11:42:14AM -0400, Eric Furman said that
> [[ is not listed in sh(1) because this construct doesn't exist in sh(1).
> There is a difference in the [[ construct in ksh. Read man ksh(1).
right, thanks for the answers.
but is it supposed to be listed in sh(1
a difference in documentation".
|
| [[ is not listed in sh(1) because this construct doesn't exist in sh(1).
| There is a difference in the [[ construct in ksh. Read man ksh(1).
| Most significantly;
| o Field splitting and file name generation are not per-
| formed on arguments.
| o
fferent things depending on whether it's run as ksh or sh.
>
> As far as my quick test (not definitive by any means) shows, it does
> not do anything different with respect to handling [[ ]].
>
> The description of [[ ]] is missing from sh(1) though, hence my
> statement
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:27:51PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
| > My manpage (ksh(1)) says :
| >
| > [[ expression ]]
| > Similar to the test and [ ... ] commands (described later),
with
| > the following exceptions:
| >
| > And then lists some exceptions. This
On 2007/07/17 16:07, Paul de Weerd wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:42:53PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> | i have found a script on hp-ux that uses
> | [[ ]] instead of the if [ ]; then construct
> | so i went to sh(1), and while [[ is listed
> | as a compound command, i couldn't find any
> |
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 03:42:53PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
| i have found a script on hp-ux that uses
| [[ ]] instead of the if [ ]; then construct
| so i went to sh(1), and while [[ is listed
| as a compound command, i couldn't find any
| explanation of what it does and how is it
| different
On 2007/07/17 15:42, frantisek holop wrote:
> so i went to sh(1), and while [[ is listed
see ksh(1)
hi there,
i have found a script on hp-ux that uses
[[ ]] instead of the if [ ]; then construct
so i went to sh(1), and while [[ is listed
as a compound command, i couldn't find any
explanation of what it does and how is it
different if at all.
could the doc experts advise please and
update the do
13 matches
Mail list logo
