(none)

Thread View: gnu.bash.bug

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by Pascal Meheut Mon, 05 Feb 1990 08:46

#1143

Author: Pascal Meheut
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 1990 08:46

13 lines
983 bytes

I'm using bash-1.04 and I think this a wonderful tool. I had ported it on some
System V (PS2 under AIX 2.02, IBM PC/RT under AIX 1.1 and 2.0, Data general 
aviion DG/UX and Macintosh under A/UX) and it works fine in all this case, with
some minor modifications. I failed with a mips, but I haven't a good compiler.

Now, one question : it seems to me that bash don't suuport thhe -i flag, to
use it as an interactive shell, but trough pipes, for instances. (I'm trying
to add a shell-mode to Micro-emacs so I need this feature) Is there a good
reason for this ? 

				Pascal Meheut.

Mail addresse : pascal@ccv.fr

Re: bash -i not interactive

#1149

Author: Steve McConnel
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1990 23:25

29 lines
1945 bytes

In article <9002050846.AA01171@ccv.fr> pascal@ccvi.ccv.fr (Pascal Meheut)
 writes:
> I'm using bash-1.04 and I think this a wonderful tool.  ...

Ditto.  Finally i don't have to put up with the local MSDOS and VMS fanatics
bragging about their command line editors!

> Now, one question : it seems to me that bash don't suport the -i flag, to
> use it as an interactive shell, but through pipes, for instances. (I'm trying
> to add a shell-mode to Micro-emacs so I need this feature) Is there a good
> reason for this ?
>				Pascal Meheut.
> Mail addresse : pascal@ccv.fr

I found it rather disconcerting when i switched from csh to bash (1.04)
that GNU emacs (18.55) no longer displayed a prompt in "Shell: run" mode.
GNU emacs appears to automatically use the -i option in an attempt to force
"interactive" behavior when firing up the shell ("echo $-" prints "io"),
but bash uses -i for another purpose altogether.  There's a bug in there
somewhere! :-) :-)

Since both sh and csh appear to support the "-i == interactive" flag, perhaps
bash should do so as well for compatibility.  After all, we don't want
those shells to have a capability that bash lacks, do we? :-) :-) :-)
-- 
Stephen McConnel
Summer Institute of Linguistics  PHONE: 214-709-2418        
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Road          UUCP: ...!{texbell|convex|utafll}!txsil!steve
Dallas, TX 75236              Internet: steve@txsil.lonestar.org

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads