Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 14:09:58 +0100 From: RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portdowngrade and meta ports Message-ID: <20120525140958.65863f97@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <CADLo83_qqGmqkQR54DKa=RemB01zGniREowMzTH7t7c2yzTO6w@mail.gmail.com> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205241335190.22032@abbf.ynefrvtuareubzr.pbz> <CADLo838ER8kAS276HTyEBFsW=UmjbcBKMrAjfzyJ%2B=JZt-F%2BtA@mail.gmail.com> <CADLo83_qqGmqkQR54DKa=RemB01zGniREowMzTH7t7c2yzTO6w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 24 May 2012 22:43:08 +0100 Chris Rees wrote: > For the archive-- just thought-- even though I did a typo there, > DON'T use: > > mv file file.bak && echo something > file > > at least with csh, file will be clobbered before mv gets to it.... I tried that in bash and csh and it worked correctly in both. e.g. in csh: %echo nothing > foo %mv foo bar && echo something > foo %cat foo something %cat bar nothing If a shell supports short-circuiting then mv must complete before echo can start, so I don't see how it can fail unless the shell opens the file before it runs mv. Are you perhaps mixing this up with what happens with: cat foo bar > foo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120525140958.65863f97>