Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 16:33:28 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sh bug? Message-ID: <20050128153328.GA96969@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <41FA008D.7030403@elischer.org> References: <41F9F2DC.7000907@elischer.org> <20050128094116.B56848@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> <41FA008D.7030403@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 28, 2005 at 01:06:21AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > Harti Brandt wrote: > >On Fri, 28 Jan 2005, Julian Elischer wrote: > >JE>however echo $$ > >JE>and > >JE> ( echo $$ ) > >JE>produce the same result. > >I think that the $$ is expanded in the old shell in any case. Although it seems similar, I prefer to say the value of $$ does not change when forking a subshell. man sh and POSIX also state that. Thus, all $ expandos work the same way. > hence my test of > ps -l vs (ps -l) > unfortunatly the shell short circuits that too if it's too simple. But unfortunately, it doesn't short circuit when you something like sh -c xterm, it keeps a useless shell waiting. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050128153328.GA96969>