Re: bug-bash Digest, Vol 236, Issue 5

[Yair Lenga]

Greg,

I agree with you 100%. Not trying to fix errexit behavior. The new errfail (if 
accepted) will provide better error handling (via opt-in) without breaking 
existing code.

Yair.

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 4, 2022, at 10:00 PM, bug-bash-request@gnu.org wrote:
> 
> From: Greg Wooledge <greg@wooledge.org>
> To: bug-bash@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Revisiting Error handling (errexit)
> Message-ID: <YsM1U//QSSFQxN52@wooledge.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
>> On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 09:33:28PM +0300, Yair Lenga wrote:
>> Thanks for taking the time to review my post. I do not want to start a
>> thread about the problems with ERREXIT. Instead, I'm trying to advocate for
>> a minimal solution.
> 
> Oh?  Then I have excellent news.  The minimal solution for dealing with
> the insurmountable problems of errexit is: do not use errexit.
> 
> It exists only because POSIX mandates it.  And POSIX mandates it only
> because it has been used historically, and historical script would
> break if it were to be removed or changed.