From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <9front-bounces@9front.inri.net> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: from 9front.inri.net (9front.inri.net [168.235.81.73]) by inbox.vuxu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDC2B22373 for ; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 10:03:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from sirjofri.de ([5.45.105.127]) by 9front; Sat Jul 6 04:00:15 -0400 2024 Received: from dummy.faircode.eu ([95.90.217.91]) by sirjofri.de; Sat Jul 6 10:00:07 +0200 2024 Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2024 10:00:00 +0200 (GMT+02:00) From: sirjofri To: 9front@9front.org Message-ID: <217ca7f7-6c1d-4f6e-9c71-696c463ff24d@sirjofri.de> In-Reply-To: <0FA3013289FC138D02F16A45F7F68FDA@smtp.pobox.com> References: <0FA3013289FC138D02F16A45F7F68FDA@smtp.pobox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Correlation-ID: <217ca7f7-6c1d-4f6e-9c71-696c463ff24d@sirjofri.de> List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: firewall-aware standard-scale layer Subject: Re: [9front] Re: /bin/"" use of rc -c instead of eval Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk 06.07.2024 03:49:46 Romano : > cpu% pwd > / > cpu% "" cd /sys > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 cpu% cd /sys/src > cpu% pwd > /sys/src > cpu% That's not how it's supposed to work though. Let me illustrate: > cpu% pwd > /sys/src > cpu% " >=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 cpu% pwd > cpu% "" >=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 cpu% pwd > /sys/src > cpu% " only displays the last command while "" executes it. An optional argument= can be used for filtering: > cpu% pwd > /sys/src > cpu% cd /lib > cpu% "" p >=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 cpu% pwd > /lib > cpu% Note that I never tested cd'ing with "", which means a lot. It's probably n= ot as useful in most cases, which makes sense if you think about it: you us= e cd to switch to another directory. When you're there, running it again is= a no-op at best, or it fails. sirjofri