[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading

From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: BASH_SUBSHELL documentation misleading
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:52:51 -0400 (EDT)
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (LMD 1167 2008-08-23)

On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Sam Liddicott wrote:

Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: i686
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -DP$ uname output: Linux sojo 2.6.35-28-generic-pae #49-Ubuntu SMP Tue Mar 1 14:58:06 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux
Machine Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu

Bash Version: 4.1
Patch Level: 5
Release Status: release

       man page says:

Incremented by one each time a subshell or subshell environment
             is spawned.  The initial value is 0.

       This suggests that:

       echo $BASH_SUBSHELL ; ( echo ) ; echo $BASH_SUBSHELL

       would not give the same answer for BASH_SUBSHELL

   No, it suggests that:


   would not give the same answer for BASH_SUBSHELL

   In your example, the second "echo $BASH_SUBSHELL" is at the same
   depth as the first.

   Chris F.A. Johnson, <http://cfajohnson.com/>
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

reply via email to

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