On 3/28/17 12:43 PM, Torka Noda wrote:
> Actually, shouldn't `bash -s`, without any command fed to its
> stdin, exit immediately, anyway...?
No. Why? It reads and executes commands from its standard input, which is
in most cases, the terminal. However, `bash -s foo Plus there is
> apparently no
On 3/28/17 1:13 PM, Torka Noda wrote:
> Modifying positional parameters with `set --` isn't supposed to
> modify the shell's behavior live, anyway. The command line is
> already parsed and options already set. So Bash should always
> use the original arguments specified on the command line, to
> p
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 10:04:16 -0400
Daniel Mills wrote:
>
> Because you want the positional parameters set with bash -s
> to take precedence over anything set in the startup files.
> Otherwise anything in .bashrc would simply override what you
> set with bash -s.
>
They could simply be copied.
M
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:29:57 -0400
Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/27/17 8:32 AM, Torka Noda wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 15:33:47 -0400
> > Chet Ramey wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Is it normal for Bash positional parameters not to be
> >>> available from ~/.bashrc during initialization?
> >>
> >> Yes. Ba
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:17:54AM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 3/27/17 9:44 AM, Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to ask if there is crucial reason, beside the correct foreground
> > process group, not to allow the lastpipe shell option for an interactive
> > bash? Maybe something
On 3/27/17 2:16 PM, Grisha Levit wrote:
> When the command to be fixed-up has a process substitution, `fc' prints
> out not only the fixed-up command (as expected) but also any commands that
> are part of a process substitution in the command:
>
>$ FCEDIT=':' # doesn't really matter
>$ :
On 3/27/17 7:49 AM, Torka Noda wrote:
>> In general, you want the \[ and \] sequences expanded in all
>> cases where the result will eventually be fed to readline,
>> and stripped when it is not. It's not feasible for bash to
>> figure that out for itself, so you have to tell it. Since
>> those e
On 3/27/17 8:32 AM, Torka Noda wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 15:33:47 -0400
> Chet Ramey wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it normal for Bash positional parameters not to be
>>> available from ~/.bashrc during initialization?
>>
>> Yes. Bash has always worked like this. The startup files are
>> read before the
On 3/27/17 9:44 AM, Dr. Werner Fink wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to ask if there is crucial reason, beside the correct foreground
> process group, not to allow the lastpipe shell option for an interactive
> bash? Maybe something like in the attachment could be an option?
Yes, there is. Once you deci
