On 6/26/09 21:21 Rick McGuire said:
> Chip,
>
> I think somebody must have hacked into your email, because it must
> have been someone else who stated:
>
> Two very compelling arguments. I concur with both.
>
> The last time this feature was discussed.
Ignoring your sarcasm, I do not deny
Chip,
I think somebody must have hacked into your email, because it must
have been someone else who stated:
Two very compelling arguments. I concur with both.
The last time this feature was discussed.
Rick
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Chip Davis wrote:
> David -
>
> I'm afraid your exampl
David -
I'm afraid your example does not demonstrate the mechanism. Try:
[dash...@localhost ~]$ ad/prototype.rex
and see if it finds the executable without the current directory being in the
PATH variable.
In your example, the shell knows that '.' is a pseudo-directory entry found in
every d
Chip -
That is not correct, at least not on Linux as the following shows.
[dash...@localhost ~]$ echo $PATH
/usr/lib/qt-3.3/bin:/usr/lib/ccache:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin:/opt/ibm/c4eb/bin:/home/dashley/bin:/usr/kerberos/bin
[dash...@localhost ~]$ pwd
/home/dash
On 6/26/09 16:05 Mark Miesfeld said:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
>>> So the bug is that it is found on Windows. The bug is not that it
>>> should be found on Linux.
>
> Well, I only called it a bug on Windows because his example fails on 3.2.0.
Not to be pedantic, but
Ah, was was just taking a look at this myself, and couldn't figure out
why the searchPath() code didn't appear to be working. This is really
a bug in the hasDirectory() method rather than being an invalid test.
This was basically just a lazy check to screen out non-relative
directory specification
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:
> Rick has just been VERY busy, and not had a chance to investigate this.
Aha, I was VERY busy yesterday, today not so much.
>>
>> So the bug is that it is found on Windows. The bug is not that it
>> should be found on Linux.
>
> I really don
Rick has just been VERY busy, and not had a chance to investigate this.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Mark Miesfeld wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM, James Johnson wrote:
>>
>> 1) Open a terminal session. Your are in some directory that we will call
>> "home".
>> 2) Within the "home" d
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM, James Johnson wrote:
>
> 1) Open a terminal session. Your are in some directory that we will call
> "home".
> 2) Within the "home" directory is a sub directory "dirA".
> 3) Within "dirA' is a sub directory "dirB".
> 4) Within "dirA" is a rexx program named "progA".
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM, James Johnson wrote:
> Consider the following:
James,
Sorry no one replied on the forum, every one is busy. This list is
easier to work with anyway.
I see what you're saying, I just had a chance to try it. I added a
line to print the current directory to bette
Consider the following:
1) Open a terminal session. Your are in some directory that we will call
"home".
2) Within the "home" directory is a sub directory "dirA".
3) Within "dirA' is a sub directory "dirB".
4) Within "dirA" is a rexx program named "progA".
5) "progA" calls "progB" which resides i
11 matches
Mail list logo
