>
> If you do cat << EOF
>
> Then any variables or commands in backticks are evaluated
>
> If you do cat << "EOF"
>
> Then variables or commands in backticks are not evaluated.
>
> Example:
>
> cat > test << EOF
> TEST=$PWD
> EOF
>
> cat > test "EOF"
> TEST=$PWD
> EOF
>
> Sincerely,
>
> William Har
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 03:21:42PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:50:57AM -0600, Scott wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 05:49:27AM -0500, William Harrington wrote:
> > >
> > > If you do cat << EOF
> > >
> > > Then any variables or commands in backticks are evaluated
> > >
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 06:50:57AM -0600, Scott wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 05:49:27AM -0500, William Harrington wrote:
> >
> > If you do cat << EOF
> >
> > Then any variables or commands in backticks are evaluated
> >
> > If you do cat << "EOF"
> >
> > Then variables or commands in backti
On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 05:49:27AM -0500, William Harrington wrote:
>
> If you do cat << EOF
>
> Then any variables or commands in backticks are evaluated
>
> If you do cat << "EOF"
>
> Then variables or commands in backticks are not evaluated.
>
> Example:
>
> cat > test << EOF
> TEST=$PWD
>
On Oct 5, 2012, at 4:09 AM, Richard Melville wrote:
>
> A little off-topic but I've pondered this for a long time: in the
> LFS book why is "EOF" always in quotes; I've found EOF without
> quotes to work just fine.
>
> Richard
>
If you do cat << EOF
Then any variables or commands in backtic
>
> Or just create your scripts with cat > blah << "EOF"
>
> Then if you have errors use sed or perl to fix them!
>
> Sincerely,
>
> William Harrington
>
A little off-topic but I've pondered this for a long time: in the LFS book
why is "EOF" always in quotes; I've found EOF without quotes to work
On Thu, 4 Oct 2012, William Harrington wrote:
> On Oct 3, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Garrett Gaston wrote:
>
>> Last time I did the LFS project I had to write all my scripts for
>> chapter 6 from another shell from the host system.
>
> vi is usually killer for a temp editor, but it works great even
> wi
On Oct 3, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Garrett Gaston wrote:
Last time I did the LFS project I had to write all my scripts for
chapter 6 from another shell from the host system.
vi is usually killer for a temp editor, but it works great even with
features tiny.
Check out some other editors that wou
Ken Moffat wrote:
> Of course, if your desktop isn't going to let you put 4 separate
> terms on the same desktop (e.g. - no, I'll not name an environment
> here) then other ways may be easier.
It's just a technique, but I like to use konsole. It works great in any
window manager, twm, xfce, e
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 04:42:18PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Garrett Gaston wrote:
> >
> > Last time I did the LFS project I had to write all my scripts for
> > chapter 6 from another shell from the host system. This time around
> > I'd like to go ahead and be able t write my chapter 6 scripts fr
Garrett Gaston wrote:
>
> Last time I did the LFS project I had to write all my scripts for
> chapter 6 from another shell from the host system. This time around
> I'd like to go ahead and be able t write my chapter 6 scripts from
> within the chroot environment. I'M currently in chapter 5, should
Last time I did the LFS project I had to write all my scripts for chapter 6
from another shell from the host system. This time around I'd like to go ahead
and be able t write my chapter 6 scripts from within the chroot environment.
I'M currently in chapter 5, should I be installing vi now or wh
12 matches
Mail list logo
