Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14626 > unrolled thread

Re: Special parameter ?

Started byEnrique Soriano <esoriano@gsyc.urjc.es>
First post2018-09-21 18:05 +0200
Last post2018-09-21 18:05 +0200
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to gnu.bash.bug

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Special parameter ? Enrique Soriano <esoriano@gsyc.urjc.es> - 2018-09-21 18:05 +0200

#14626 — Re: Special parameter ?

FromEnrique Soriano <esoriano@gsyc.urjc.es>
Date2018-09-21 18:05 +0200
SubjectRe: Special parameter ?
Message-ID<mailman.1099.1537545968.1284.bug-bash@gnu.org>
> The thing that creates the background job IS a foreground pipeline. It's a foreground pipeline that creates a background
> job, if that makes sense.

Sure. That's the mechanism to implement the background job.

The problem is that the user that reads the manual is dealing with the
"background" and "foreground" abstractions; for him, the most recently
foreground command in my example is false.

> I recommend to store the value of $? in a variable if you plan on using it afterwards, since it's extremely easy to end
> up overriding its value.

Thanks, but I am not trying to implement anything. I am trying to fix
the man page  :)

> You're right, but it might be less confusing if I removed the "foreground"
> from the description.

This could help.


-- 
Enrique Soriano
Escuela Superior de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación,
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
Tel: 914888762
http://gsyc.urjc.es/~esoriano

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | gnu.bash.bug


csiph-web