Greg,
I agree with you 100%. Not trying to fix errexit behavior. The new errfail (if
accepted) will provide better error handling (via opt-in) without breaking
existing code.
Yair.
Sent from my iPad
> On Jul 4, 2022, at 10:00 PM, bug-bash-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
>
> From: Greg Wooledge
> To:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 at 22:22, Yair Lenga wrote:
> I've tried to look into a minimal
> solution that will address the most common pitfall of errexit, where many
> sequences (e.g., series of commands in a function) will not properly
> "break" with 'errexit'. For example:
>
> function foo {
> cat
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, at 3:55 PM, Yair Lenga wrote:
> I'm sorry - I misunderstood your original comments. I'll prepare the
> patched version (at least, I would like to add comments before
> publishing...) , and share it.
> Where/how can I post it ?
Send it to this list as an attachment [1] with a .
Hi Lawrence,
I'm sorry - I misunderstood your original comments. I'll prepare the
patched version (at least, I would like to add comments before
publishing...) , and share it.
Where/how can I post it ? I did not see anyone else dropping source
code/patches into the group ?
Yair
On Mon, Jul 4, 20
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, at 2:33 PM, Yair Lenga wrote:
> Thanks for taking the time to review my post. I do not want to start a
> thread about the problems with ERREXIT.
Neither do I.
> Instead, I'm trying to advocate for
> a minimal solution.
>
> [...]
>
> Please take a look at the specific short ex
On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 09:33:28PM +0300, Yair Lenga wrote:
> Thanks for taking the time to review my post. I do not want to start a
> thread about the problems with ERREXIT. Instead, I'm trying to advocate for
> a minimal solution.
Oh? Then I have excellent news. The minimal solution for dealin
Lawrence,
Thanks for taking the time to review my post. I do not want to start a
thread about the problems with ERREXIT. Instead, I'm trying to advocate for
a minimal solution. There are already many threads in bash mailing lists,
stack overflow, and numerous articles related to advanced bash prog
On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 06:15:27PM +0200, Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, 18:07 wrote:
> > When I am running the script, it says "[[: not found."
You're running the script with sh, not with bash.
If you are typing "sh myscript", that immediately identifies the source
of the pr
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, at 8:20 AM, Yair Lenga wrote:
> I was able to change Bash source and build a version that supports the new
> option 'errfail' (following the 'pipefail' naming), which will do the
> "right" thing in many cases - including the above - 'foo' will return 1,
> and will NOT proceed t
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, 18:07 wrote:
> Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
> Machine: x86_64
> OS: linux-gnu
> Compiler: gcc
> Compilation CFLAGS: -g -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -flto=auto
> -ffat-lto-objects -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-secur
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -g -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -flto=auto
-ffat-lto-objects -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat -Werror=format-security
-Wall
uname output: Linux asus-laptop.exa
Sounds great to me. I also use Bash for mission-critical processes.
Philip
On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 8:22 AM Yair Lenga wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In my projects, I'm using bash to manage large scale jobs. Works very well,
> especially, when access to servers is limited to ssh. One annoying issue is
> the e
Hi,
In my projects, I'm using bash to manage large scale jobs. Works very well,
especially, when access to servers is limited to ssh. One annoying issue is
the error handling - the limits/shortcomings of the 'errexit', which has
been documented and discussed to the Nth degree in multiple forums.
13 matches
Mail list logo
