[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: ls command

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: ls command
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:23:51 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100301 Fedora/3.0.3-1.fc12 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.3

On 03/19/2010 07:51 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:
>> On 03/17/2010 04:14 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>> Paul Gerber <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> /bin/ls: No match
>>> That message comes from the shell (csh or tcsh).
>> Or bash, if you turn on the non-default failglob option (which exists to
>> match the non-POSIXy behavior of csh).
> No, bash would print this:
> bash: no match: *.pdb.Z

That's one place where bash is nicer than tcsh - the error message is
accurate in telling which program had no match (it was the shell;
execution of ls was refused), whereas tcsh's implies that ls got a
chance to run, even though it did not.

But I'm biased - I hate the csh family of shells, because they are just
too hard to script with.

Eric Blake   address@hidden    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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