From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:29:00 +0100
From: Martin Neubauer <m.ne@gmx.net>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Message-ID: <20081216172900.GA1011@shodan.homeunix.net>
References: <31b7dfbe989528c1e4cebd8f89eb64e2@quanstro.net>
	<00c6aae8ce2767baa34373ed1c3c169d@9grid.es>
	<a560a5d00812160822x9f113f7q177599501dc6a478@mail.gmail.com>
	<374746928307662c140f9605a255bf14@coraid.com>
	<a560a5d00812160856mcc9e647k7d05ca9c19e08e44@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a560a5d00812160856mcc9e647k7d05ca9c19e08e44@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Subject: Re: [9fans] sam/rc script problem
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 62e26a8c-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

I tried your example (reduced to the to given lines) on my FreeBSD
system and got identical output both ways. So I suspect it's a linux
(or distro) thingie. I'm quite puzzled as to what could be the
cause, though.

Nevertheless, I'd still be cautious about here documents and variable
substitutions. (Maybe sam -d <<'EOF' would be better suited for
normal use.)

	Martin

* Rudolf Sykora (rudolf.sykora@gmail.com) wrote:
> > i think rc is interpreting $ as a here document
> > variable and messing up.
>
> By why then i works nicely in plan9 and not in linux, although I use
> 'rc' in both?
> R