On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 07:06:22PM +0200, Willem Ferguson wrote: > On 04/06/2015 18:38, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote: > >Now, really... Why do you state that? _That's_ silly. `man 1 bash': > > > >,---- > >| BUGS > >| It's too big and too slow. > >| > >| There are some subtle differences between bash and traditional > >| versions of sh, mostly because of the POSIX specification. > >| > >| Aliases are confusing in some uses. > >| > >| Shell builtin commands and functions are not stoppable/restartable. > >| > >| Compound commands and command sequences of the form `a ; b ; c' are > >| not handled gracefully when process suspension is attempted. When a > >| process is stopped, the shell immediately executes the next command > >| in the sequence. It suffices to place the sequence of commands between > >| parentheses to force it into a subshell, which may be stopped as a > >| unit. > >| > >| Array variables may not (yet) be exported. > >| > >| There may be only one active coprocess at a time. > >`---- > > > >You stuck bash on the shebang line. Such error can only happen if > >/bin/bash is a symlink to some other shell, I guess. Is that the > >case?
I'm a little unclear if the shebang is supposed to be honored if you call this as an argument to a shell (vs. call the script directly) /bin/bash is bash on Ubuntu /bin/sh is dash > I have not quite managed to isolate this problem. It is some > context-specific thing because all my other bash scripts that I tested run > quite ok. I am not ruling out the possibility that this is an Ubuntu quirk. > My Ubuntu is 14.04, a little aged and, as I indicated, I get some system > error messages. Maybe time for update. Your discussion is interesting. For now you could just call the script as bash subsurface/scripts/build.sh /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
