On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 12:52, Bryan Murdock wrote: > I knew I was getting something not quite right in my explanation there. > Thanks for clearing that up Stuart. > > The lack of a sha-bang doesn't prevent it from being started as a child > process, but would having the sha-bang cause it always execute as a > child process, sourced or not?
The lack of sha-bang _does_ prevent it from being started as a child process. It prevents it from being started as any type of process. With out the sha-bang your would have to type sh myfile.sh or cat myfile.sh | sh making it input, not a process. (Actually, that's all the hash bang does is tell the kernel to start sh, or some other program, then send the file as input to the program.) When you source the file, you are specifically telling it not to start a new shell but execute it within the current shell. Taken as input, the # marks a shell comment and the rest of the line is ignored. Now if you _execute_ any shell scripts while sourcing, those of course will have separate shells. So if a sourced file needs to include another file it must also source that file. Clear as mud? > The book link you gave me, Stuart, sadly didn't work. :( The Korn shell : user and programming manual Olczak, Anatole Pricey be available in the library. > P.S. For some reason now that I'm using HP's exchange server for email File a bug report with HP, unless this is mimicking a broken Exchange behavior. -- Stuart Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED], AIM:StuartMJansen> "What hole did you dig that up from?" -- my roommate commenting on my taste in music
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
