Re: curiosity: 'typeset -xr' vs. 'export -r'

2022-12-11 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Sun, 11 Dec 2022 18:37:02 -0800 From:L A Walsh Message-ID: <639693ce.3060...@tlinx.org> | This seems to be an unnecessary "make-wrong", no? I.e. | would it cause some syntactic or semantic problem in bash, | if it were allowed? Not for me to say, but I do

Re: curiosity: 'typeset -xr' vs. 'export -r'

2022-12-11 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
On Sun, Dec 11, 2022, at 9:37 PM, L A Walsh wrote: > I suppose one could create an alias (despite advice that > functions are "better" -- in this case a function doesn't work). > I'm using ':;' for PS1, so cut/paste works: > > PS1=':; ' > > :; Export () { > :; typeset -x "$@" > :; } > :; Export

curiosity: 'typeset -xr' vs. 'export -r'

2022-12-11 Thread L A Walsh
This is mostly a 'nit', but I noticed I had "typeset -xr" in one of my scripts to mean export+read-only and was wondering why "export -r" was disallowed (err message): bash: export: -r: invalid option export: usage: export [-fn] [name[=value] ...] or export -p This seems to be an unnec