Re: [techtalk] KDE / OpenSource
- Original Message - From: Caitlyn M. Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Dan Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [techtalk] KDE / OpenSource > That doesn't work in the business world, unfortunately. People would > probably learn better and more quickly if it did. > > I had the rug pulled out from under me the day before I was supposed to > start my new job, and I, in my anger and frustration, decided to go back to > running my own business. Wow, does that hit a harpstring for me! I can relate Caitlyn. I come from a PC background, and I have been in business for myself as a PC Tech consultant doing upgrades, repairs etc... for the home and small business market. I did that for 2 years full time, after which I wanted more experience in networking and more $'s ;) So, I went back into the twisted Corp World and worked my way up to IS Director supporting 7 facilities, 2 Programmers and a PC Trainer. However, I live in a rural area where Linux is barely even heard of. Now, I have an SO I am trying to get to, and have been interviewing in more metro areas. I have also been busting my butt to learn linux, php, & MySql not only to make myself more marketable, but because I actually enjoy it. Over the past month or so, I have been interviewing for various positions. It is the most frustrating experience I have ever gone through. One classic example is I interviewed for a position that didn't even exist! This chick had no clue of what open source software even was. I am not one to give up, but I am with you. It's back out on my own again for me! Marketing is going to be my middle name! LOL Sharon ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] BASH command return value
My PS1 prompt has the following string, PS1='($?)\u@\h:\w =>' In this case, when my command fails the BASH variable $? value is displayed in my prompt. What is happening is that a command return value stays there until an new command is issued. A newline for the shell will still return the previous $? value. $? value is never reset until a new command is issued. (0)subb3@myhost:~ => (0)subb3@myhost:~ => lssdfh <== This is no command (258)subb3@myhost:~ => (258)subb3@myhost:~ => (258)subb3@myhost:~ => (258)subb3@myhost:~ => ls (0)subb3@myhost:~ => When I change the PS1 sring to, PS1='($?)`whoami`@\h:\w =>' The return value for $? is immediately displayed in the next prompt. (0)subb3@myhost:~ => (0)subb3@myhost:~ => lssdfh (258)subb3@myhost:~ => (0)subb3@myhost:~ => (0)subb3@myhost:~ => ls (0)subb3@myhost:~ => ls o ls: o: No such file or directory (1)subb3@myhost:~ => In BASH, why does the "\u" and "whoami" make a big difference for the $? value in PS1 string? The BASH version is 2.04. -- Subba Rao [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/ => Time is relative. Here is a new way to look at time. <= http://www.smcinnovations.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] BASH command return value
when you change \u to `whoami`, you get the 0 value because you are executing `whoami` everytime you get a prompt, i think. `whoami` has an exit code of 0, successful, so that's what goes into $?. \u, \h, \w, \W, etc aren't executed, they're properties of the shell at that time. that's the way i understand it, anyway. you can get some weird stuff in there. I have old bash laying around, and all $? gives me is the exit code of the export PS1... command, and it never changes. -mandi On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Subba Rao wrote: > > My PS1 prompt has the following string, > > PS1='($?)\u@\h:\w =>' > > In this case, when my command fails the BASH variable $? value is displayed > in my prompt. What is happening is that a command return value stays there > until an new command is issued. A newline for the shell will still return the > previous $? value. $? value is never reset until a new command is issued. > > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => lssdfh <== This is no command > (258)subb3@myhost:~ => > (258)subb3@myhost:~ => > (258)subb3@myhost:~ => > (258)subb3@myhost:~ => ls > > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => > > When I change the PS1 sring to, > > PS1='($?)`whoami`@\h:\w =>' > > The return value for $? is immediately displayed in the next prompt. > > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => lssdfh > (258)subb3@myhost:~ => > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => ls > > (0)subb3@myhost:~ => ls o > ls: o: No such file or directory > (1)subb3@myhost:~ => > > In BASH, why does the "\u" and "whoami" make a big difference for the $? value in > PS1 string? The BASH version is 2.04. > > -- > > Subba Rao > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://pws.prserv.net/truemax/ > > => Time is relative. Here is a new way to look at time. <= > http://www.smcinnovations.com > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Newbie
Hello Everyone, I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Janice Bub and I live in Ontario :) A co-worker of mine (we work at an ISP), Melanie Burrett told me about this cool Linux site for girls. I'm very new to Linux and I'm teaching myself RedHat 6.0. I look forward to reading the discussions and sharing what I can. Janice - This mail sent via Golden Triangle Web-Mail http://www.golden.net ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] BASH command return value
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 11:34:07AM -0400, Subba Rao wrote: > > PS1='($?)\u@\h:\w =>' > PS1='($?)`whoami`@\h:\w =>' > In BASH, why does the "\u" and "whoami" make a big difference for > the $? value in PS1 string? The BASH version is 2.04. My assumption is that using whoami with the ` ` causes it to need to reevaulate the PS1 enviroment variable every time. During the reevaulation of PS1, it updates $? along with it. While using \u is handled internally by the shell. $? is only evaluated when PS1 is set. -- Dan Nguyen | It is with true love as it is with ghosts; [EMAIL PROTECTED] | everyone talks of it, but few have seent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |-Maxime De La Rochefoucauld ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Newbie
Woohoo Janice(:! Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > Hello Everyone, > > I'd like to introduce myself. My name is Janice Bub and I live in Ontario > :) > A co-worker of mine (we work at an ISP), Melanie Burrett told me about this > > cool Linux site for girls. I'm very new to Linux and I'm teaching myself > RedHat 6.0. I look forward to reading the discussions and sharing what I > can. > > Janice > > - > This mail sent via Golden Triangle Web-Mail > http://www.golden.net > > > > ___ > techtalk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk > - This mail sent via Golden Triangle Web-Mail http://www.golden.net ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] problems upgrading to gnome 1.2 and enlightenment 0.16.4
Hey all Hope somebody can help - I'm having a complete nightmare trying to upgrade to the above over a standard RH6.1 install (completely fresh - I thought I'd start over...) on a PIII 500MHz, 64MB, RIVA 32MB TNT2 dual boot w W98. The RH6.1 goes fine - everything working as you'd expect. I then apply the RPMs for gnome 1.2 with only one problem - ggv-0.5.3-1 complains about not having the bonobo libraries but that's OK 'cos its only an application, right? However, I'm a bit dubious that the install has gone 100% as nothing much seems to change... so first question : is there any place I can look to convince myself that the gnome install has gone OK and I'm now running 1.2? Apologies if this is a silly question - this is the first time I've tried to do this. Anyway I then try to upgrade enlightenment. I apply the imlib-1.9.8-1 and fnlib-0.5-1 RPMs and then the enlightenment-0.16.4-1 RPM and again everything appears to go swimmingly until I restart enlightenment whereupon I get the nasty grey box popping up saying - "Enlightenment could not initialise imlib." which isn't good and causes enlightenment to exit pretty rapidly. Does anyone have any ideas? I can't see what's gone wrong - the only thing I can think of is to try to install from source but I'd prefer to figure out this and hopefully save myself some time if that doesn't make any difference. Thanks in advance Colin (stressed). Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] BASH command return value
> My PS1 prompt has the following string, > > PS1='($?)\u@\h:\w =>' > > In this case, when my command fails the BASH variable $? value is displayed > in my prompt. What is happening is that a command return value stays there > until an new command is issued. > > When I change the PS1 sring to, > > PS1='($?)`whoami`@\h:\w =>' > > The return value for $? is immediately displayed in the next prompt. > > In BASH, why does the "\u" and "whoami" make a big difference for the $? > value in PS1 string? The BASH version is 2.04. I'm willing to bet that BASH figures out your name once with the \u call, while putting commands into your PS1 prompt will cause that command to be executed with each prompt you ask for. Because the the "whoami" command executed properly, it is actually the command returning the 0. But that's just a guess. // joey tsai ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
