pkgsrc (for NetBSD and other systems) has no listed bash maintainer, so ...
(and please understand that I in no way speak for pkgsrc or NetBSD here).
As long as patch(1) can handle the format, which form (context, unified, ...)
patches are released in makes no difference at all.
pkgsrc defaults t
Ilkka Virta wrote:
If the 1st expression is false, it would skip directly to
the '||' and would execute the 3rd clause.
If the 1st expresion is true then it does the 2nd clause.
If that is false, the '||' clause is done, but if true,
the '||' clause would not be done.
In other words, ||
On 05/31/2018 01:54 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> I am not sure what predence rule you see working as
> expected, but in sh (bash, or any other Bourne syntax
> or POSIX shell) there is no precedence for && and ||
> they (in the absense of grouping) are simply executed
> left to right as written.
Here is
On 2018-05-30 09:04, Marty E. Plummer wrote:
> Maintainers, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this matter. If
> the diffs are produced as -p1 unified diffs, then downstreams who do
> convert from -p0 context won't have to, and distros who work around it
> won't either.
Speaking as maintaine
On 05/30/2018 02:04 AM, Marty E. Plummer wrote:
Maintainers, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this matter. If
the diffs are produced as -p1 unified diffs, then downstreams who do
convert from -p0 context won't have to, and distros who work around it
won't either.
Makes no real differen
On 2018-05-30 09:04, Marty E. Plummer wrote:
> Maintainers, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this matter. If
> the diffs are produced as -p1 unified diffs, then downstreams who do
> convert from -p0 context won't have to, and distros who work around it
> won't either.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mar
On 31.5. 02:20, L A Walsh wrote:
Ilkka Virta wrote:
On 22.5. 00:17, Uriel wrote:
As you know, a conditional is of the type:
if [[ EXPRESSION ]]; then TRUE CONDITION; else ALTERNATIVE RESULT; fi
Or with logical operators and groups:
[[ EXPRESSION ]] && { TRUE CONDITION; } || { ALTERNATIVE RES
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 05:02:58PM -0700, L A Walsh wrote:
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 04:17:18PM -0500, Uriel wrote:
> > > [[ EXPRESSION ]]; && { TRUE CONDITION; } || { ALTERNATIVE RESULT; }
> > https://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashPitfalls#pf22
> pf22 is wrong.
It's not wrong.
"Marty E. Plummer" wrote:
> Maintainers, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this matter. If
> the diffs are produced as -p1 unified diffs, then downstreams who do
> convert from -p0 context won't have to, and distros who work around it
> won't either.
Alpine Linux uses -p1 and unified d
Date:Wed, 30 May 2018 17:02:58 -0700
From:L A Walsh
Message-ID: <5b0f3bb2.1000...@tlinx.org>
| I.e. precedence rules seem to work as expected.
I am not sure what predence rule you see working as
expected, but in sh (bash, or any other Bourne syntax
or POSIX shell)
10 matches
Mail list logo
