emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Forget about "bash -c bash file.sh" (Re: bash source code block: pro


From: Bruno Barbier
Subject: Re: Forget about "bash -c bash file.sh" (Re: bash source code block: problem after ssh commands)
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 09:54:46 +0100

Matt <matt@excalamus.com> writes:

>  ---- On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 09:29:56 +0100  Bruno Barbier 
>
>  > IIUC, what Max is saying is that you should not concentrate on
>  > *that specific command* because that command doesn't do what you think
>  > it does.
>
> Cool, it sounds like we're agreed (albeit for different reasons).

Great :-)


>  > To reproduce, I'm personally still using:
>  > 
>  >     cat /tmp/test.sh | bash
>  >     
>  > which is, IIUC, what:
>  > 
>  >     (process-file "bash" "/tmp/test.sh")
>
> Yes, agreed.  I think that's more like what's happening.  
>
> What about the ("-c" "bash") passed into process-file?  

Useless indirection when the command is "bash" is the same as
'shell-file-name', like in our case ?

Maybe ...

But, you're right.  To be safe, from now on, I'll use:

    cat /tmp/test.sh | bash -c bash


Thanks.

Bruno




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]