RW <rwmaillists <at> googlemail.com> writes: > > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:10:48 +0000 (UTC) > jb wrote: > > > > You gave portsnap two commands - one succeeded and the other failed.
Nope. I gave ONE command: 'portsnap fetch update'. > > But this looks like a flaky entry validation - it should be rejected > > up front as invalid entry, even if it applied to the second part - > > "update". Because the effect of processing the entire entry "fetch" > > plus "update" is lost anyway. > > Not isn't, you've brought the snapshot up to date. Well, yes. But as I already explained, there was ONE command. If I wanted to be satisfied with two command outcomes, even if logically linked by sequential execution, then I would do: # portsnap fetch; portsnap update There is a subtle, but important difference. In general, if I wanted to check for command completion code, which is quite common in UNIX CLI or scripting env, it would make a lot of difference if a command failed half way in both cases: 'portsnap fetch update; check-completion-code' and 'portsnap fetch; check-completion-code; portsnap update; check-completion-code' jb _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
