Re: getting weird output out of 'echo' w/args

2013-05-29 Thread Pierre Gaston
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: > > > Chet Ramey wrote: >> On 5/29/13 9:08 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: >>> Why would I get this: >>> echo "gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x]" >>> gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so >>> [u:

Re: getting weird output out of 'echo' w/args

2013-05-29 Thread Linda Walsh
Chet Ramey wrote: > On 5/29/13 9:08 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: >> Why would I get this: >> >>> echo "gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so >>> [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x]" >> gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so >> [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x] >> >>> echo gtk-2.0/2.10.0/

Re: getting weird output out of 'echo' w/args

2013-05-29 Thread Chet Ramey
On 5/29/13 9:08 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: > Why would I get this: > >> echo "gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so >> [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x]" > gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so > [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x] > >> echo gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so >>

getting weird output out of 'echo' w/args

2013-05-29 Thread Linda Walsh
Why would I get this: > echo "gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so > [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x]" gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x] > echo gtk-2.0/2.10.0/engines/liboxygen-gtk.so > [u::rwx,u:law:rwx,g::r-x,m::rwx,o::r-x] gtk-2.0/2.10.

Re: Obsolete SIGRTMAX-n signal names

2013-05-29 Thread Eric Blake
On 05/29/2013 09:04 AM, John Reiser wrote: > Comment: In practice SIGRTMIN is a very stable value. For each architecture > SIGRTMIN is chosen at the time of the original port, and after that SIGRTMIN > "never" will change, although in theory it could. The value of SIGRTMAX > is less stable becau

Re: Obsolete SIGRTMAX-n signal names

2013-05-29 Thread John Reiser
On 05/29/2013 01:35 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: > On 04/24/2013 05:26 PM, Chet Ramey wrote: >> On 4/23/13 2:05 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: >>> As reported in http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?8025 , I would like to see the >>> SIGRTMAX-n signal names disappear. >>> >>> Signals should never ever be addressed w

Re: Obsolete SIGRTMAX-n signal names

2013-05-29 Thread Harald Hoyer
On 04/24/2013 05:26 PM, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 4/23/13 2:05 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: >> As reported in http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?8025 , I would like to see the >> SIGRTMAX-n signal names disappear. >> >> Signals should never ever be addressed with SIGRTMAX-n. Signals should >> always be >> add