Re: Bash bug?

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

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.
*/

Attachment: pgpFOmPDOm5jE.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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

[Index of Archives] [Current Fedora Users] [Fedora Desktop] [Fedora SELinux] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [KDE Users] [Fedora Tools] [Fedora Docs]