Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 03:07:26 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bug in sh? Message-ID: <19980418030726.52891@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <199804180041.BAA21776@awfulhak.org>; from Brian Somers on Sat, Apr 18, 1998 at 01:41:08AM %2B0100 References: <19980417193737.36274@follo.net> <199804180041.BAA21776@awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 18, 1998 at 01:41:08AM +0100, Brian Somers wrote: > [.....] > > #!/bin/sh > > . <<EOF > > `SHELL=sh && export SHELL && tset -s -Q \?$TERM < /dev/tty` > > EOF > [.....] > > The second version doesn't work - it exits immediately, and seems to > > run tset _after_ the shell has quit. > > This isn't a bug as you describe it. IMHO, the bug is that the shell > doesn't complain that you've failed to pass ``.'' a file name. My fault. I always forget that <<EOF doesn't expand to a temporary filename (as it ought to, and used to in my old world), but instead is just one more way of putting things at stdin. . still shouldn't just continue, and run the command in a second fork . _after_ the initial shell script has quit. That _has_ to be a bug? Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980418030726.52891>