Re: Bash bug?

• To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: Re: Bash bug?
• From: Tim Waugh <twaugh@xxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:46:20 +0100
• In-reply-to: <20050926131521.14893.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• List-help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=help>
• List-id: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list.redhat.com>
• List-post: <mailto:[email protected]>
• List-subscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
• List-unsubscribe: <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
• References: <1127723451.3224.44.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050926131521.14893.qmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Reply-to: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i

On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 06:15:21AM -0700, BRUCE STANLEY wrote:

> This seems to be a Linux issue with the shells.

It is correct behaviour, and POSIX-compliant to boot.

Please see the bash FAQ, question E4.

  /usr/share/doc/bash-3.0/FAQ

Tim.
*/

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Bash bug?
    • From: BRUCE STANLEY

• References:
  • Re: Bash bug?
    • From: Jeff Vian
  • Re: Bash bug?
    • From: BRUCE STANLEY

• Prev by Date: Upgrade from RH9 to FC4 and missing yum
• Next by Date: Re: Empty USB hard drive shows 81% full
• Previous by thread: Re: Bash bug?
• Next by thread: Re: Bash bug?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread