Re: Should $(fg) resume a stopped job?

From	Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Subject	Re: Should $(fg) resume a stopped job?
Date	2020-08-03 15:41 -0400
Organization	ITS, Case Western Reserve University
Message-ID	<mailman.688.1596483701.2739.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References	<CAH7i3Lr72e4Bn3q-Ywn6vnyvT9gx4wTCe6Q9tLAVHV-L7ufhrw@mail.gmail.com> <08840792-f5f6-34b1-ca5a-81e5488eba36@case.edu> <CAH7i3Lozdz2XxHaTkbK+Mp5bBK8KOknF8QhJuPoNbn628ijOvA@mail.gmail.com> <aac974a2-3f44-350e-f880-b487f48446b4@case.edu>

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/31/20 12:43 PM, Oğuz wrote:

>     Maybe a minor bug, but certainly a choice. The command substitution keeps
>     the jobs list around, since the subshell is supposed to be an exact copy of
>     the parent, and it's useful to get the output of `jobs' out of command
>     substitution.
> 
>     You just can't expect to do anything with any of those jobs, since the
>     command substitution shell is not the parent of any of them. It would
>     make sense to have `fg' complain about that.
> 
> 
> Right, it would. bosh behaves the same way as bash btw.

Behavior is mixed. I put in something that should produce an error when you
try to use `fg' or `bg' in a command substitution without having done
anything to enable job control first.

Chet

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: Should $(fg) resume a stopped job? Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu> - 2020-08-03 15:41 -0400

csiph-web