On Monday 03 September 2007 10:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> May I offer another idea.
Of course!
> AIUI, you've already got one complete
> build script?
Yea, it's still a very rough script; each time I look at it I find
something to learn.
> If'n it were me, the simplest thing would be to cut
>> 2. is a little more sensible to me, but only because I know
>> of a very simple way to create the markers.
>
>I like that; a lot more flexible than my initial idea of copying the
>running script, doing a sed, and then running the new script.
May I offer another idea. AIUI, you've already got
On Sunday 02 September 2007 10:42, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> 2. is a little more sensible to me, but only because I know
> of a very simple way to create the markers.
I like that; a lot more flexible than my initial idea of copying the
running script, doing a sed, and then running the new script.
T
On 9/2/07, Trent Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 02 September 2007 08:45, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > It depends what you do with your script and if you keep some kind of
> > progress marker so that the newly invoked script knows where to pick
> > up.
> That's going to be the tricky part.
On Sunday 02 September 2007 08:45, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> It depends what you do with your script and if you keep some kind of
> progress marker so that the newly invoked script knows where to pick
> up.
That's going to be the tricky part. The only ideas I've had so far are:
1. Somehow pause the
On 9/2/07, Trent Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 02 September 2007 08:00, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > That's fine. I use the temp bash all the time to do the final build.
> That's good to hear; the only difference I noticed was that the second
> bash was compiled to use the readline we ins
On Sunday 02 September 2007 08:00, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> That's fine. I use the temp bash all the time to do the final build.
That's good to hear; the only difference I noticed was that the second
bash was compiled to use the readline we install in chapter 6, and I
wasn't sure if anything depend
On 9/1/07, Trent Shea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know of any problems that could creep in if I
> skip "exec /bin/bash --login +h" and continuing to use the bash built
> in chapter 5 until I'm done chapter 6? I ask because I have no idea how
> to pass control of a running script to the
Does anyone know of any problems that could creep in if I
skip "exec /bin/bash --login +h" and continuing to use the bash built
in chapter 5 until I'm done chapter 6? I ask because I have no idea how
to pass control of a running script to the new shell; way out of my
league...
Trent.
--
http
