On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 11:10:23PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 07:03:28PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 10:19:13PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: > > > > - for F in $(ls $1); do > > > > + for F in $(/bin/ls $1); do > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > Is there any reason why you prefer this solution over 'run-parts --list', > > > which had been mentioned in #337650? > > > > Not really. Does it matter? > > I dislike hardcoded paths when they are not necessary. > Here > for F in $1/*; do > should also work.
True, but on the other hand /bin/ls will presumably work even if run-parts itself breaks. The for loop may be a better option though. I'll think about it, since I don't really care either way :-) - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
