Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: exec last command in last pipeline.
- X-seq: zsh-workers 7437
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: exec last command in last pipeline.
- Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 22:05:30 +0000
- In-reply-to: <rsq7lmy73h0.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <rsq7lmy73h0.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Aug 15, 1:04am, Tanaka Akira wrote:
} Subject: exec last command in last pipeline.
}
} --- exec.c 1999/07/24 14:02:56 1.1.1.19
} +++ exec.c 1999/08/14 15:55:32
} @@ -1522,7 +1522,7 @@
}
} /* Current shell should not fork unless the *
} * exec occurs at the end of a pipeline. */
} - if ((cflags & BINF_EXEC) && last1 == 2)
} + if ((cflags & BINF_EXEC) && last1)
} flags |= CFLAG_EXEC;
}
} /* Empty command */
I'm extremely dubious of that change. The only way that last1 can be set
to 2 is here in execpline2():
if (pline->type == END)
execcmd(pline->left, input, output, how, last1 ? 1 : 2);
If you remove the test of last1 == 2 in execcmd(), there's no reason to
test for last1 in execpline2(). But both tests have been there since
before version 3.0.0; I'm concerned that the shell is going to exec in
some cases where it should not.
--
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author