Re: Documentation discrepancy for interactive-comments option

Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Date	2019-01-20 09:49 -0800
References	<b7bd2cc4-0e9c-41c3-bdfe-c1ecc9aa2791@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID	<8846cecb-5d29-43ca-9f30-9c50ecfed6b2@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: Documentation discrepancy for interactive-comments option
From	ingy@ingy.net

Show all headers | View raw

On Thursday, January 10, 2019 at 1:44:55 PM UTC-8, in...@ingy.net wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> I noticed that many files in the `doc` directory use `interactive_comments` for the `interactive-comments` set option. (`_` vs `-`). I first noticed this using `man bash`.
> 
> This seems to be the case from now back to 3.0. I didn't look further back.
> 
> Cheers, Ingy

I see now that `set` uses `interactive-comments` and `shopt` uses `interactive_comments`.

It does seem to be the case that `interactive-comments` is not listed as an option-name for `set` in the bash.1 man page.

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Documentation discrepancy for interactive-comments option ingy@ingy.net - 2019-01-10 13:44 -0800
  Re: Documentation discrepancy for interactive-comments option ingy@ingy.net - 2019-01-20 09:49 -0800

csiph-web