[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposed doc updates

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Proposed doc updates
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:55:40 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Hi Stepan,

* Stepan Kasal wrote on Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 04:21:31PM CET:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 06:41:39PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > an error with
> >   nonexistent 2> /dev/null
> ...
> > Does anybody know a shell which still outputs anything with this?
> I think ash outputs an error message here.  And I think ash is the /bin/sh
> on some *BSD systems.

No, this is a misunderstanding (your statement is true, but not what I
wanted to know).  See below.

> Look at this patch (by Eric Blake):
> I believe the problem there was that when configure tried to run
>       /bin/sh5 2>/dev/null
> the /bin/sh still has printed something like:
>       /bin/sh5: command not found

Yes.  ACK to all this.

My question was:  Are there any shells that have a problem with this:
  { nonexistent; } 2>/dev/null
? (important question!)

My comment was: Besides ash, some Bourne shells also output the error
  nonexistent 2>/dev/null
, but they do accept
  { nonexistent; } 2>/dev/null
and do not output anything with it.  They do fork for the { }, though.
Most newer shells don't fork for the { }, so that gives us a speed
advantage when using { ...; } rather than ( ...).

My other comment was:  nonexist_a_nt is a common typo (one which I tend
to make as well).

Did I make myself clear now?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]