also sprach Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx> [2009.07.20.1027 +0200]: > `l' in the function definition is in command position and is expanded > as an alias, defining `/bin/ls' and `-F' as functions which call > `/bin/ls', which gets a bit recursive. This can be avoided if you use > `function' to define a function, which doesn't expand aliases. It is > possible to argue for extra warnings somewhere in this mess. Indeed, this fixed my problem, and I also renamed the function to something else, now that I found out about the nameclash. Warnings would be nice. However, there still seems to be some regression, but I cannot quite reproduce this for other cases. E.g. it is still possible to define a function -F without the error. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@xxx> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems there are only 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who don't.
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)