Date:	Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:10:00 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	h DOT m DOT brand AT hccnet DOT nl
Message-Id:	<2110-Thu14Jun2001190959+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com, "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com>
In-reply-to:	<20010614160042.EFE9.H.M.BRAND@hccnet.nl>
Subject:	Re: Gnu compiler for Perl
References:	<20010614145506 DOT EFE4 DOT H DOT M DOT BRAND AT hccnet DOT nl> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010614160710 DOT 6496A AT is> <20010614160042 DOT EFE9 DOT H DOT M DOT BRAND AT hccnet DOT nl>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:03:56 +0200
> From: "H.Merijn Brand" <h DOT m DOT brand AT hccnet DOT nl>
> 
> I just did. (And also submitted a patch to change '>/dev/null', '>
> /dev/null', '>>/dev/null' and '>> /dev/null' all to '>>/dev/null'
> for consistency) 
> 
> For the moment it passes all /dev/null issues, but now croacks on
> touch and tr issues. Should I persue or wait for possible bash
> changes?

I don't expect problems with `tr' and `touch' to be Bash issues.  So
please try to investigate them if you have time.  Thanks.

Mark, could you please see what does Bash do with "> /dev/null" that
it doesn't do with ">> /dev/null"?  I don't understand why one works
while the other doesn't; the suggestion to use >> was a hunch (I've
seen similar problems with PRN on other versions of Windows, even
under COMMAND.COM).

- Raw text -