From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2629 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2011 23:28:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 16226 Received: (qmail 4497 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2011 23:28:40 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at vinc17.net does not designate permitted sender hosts) Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 01:28:37 +0200 From: Vincent Lefevre To: zsh-users@zsh.org Subject: Re: [[ -o interactive ]] vs if [[ -o login ]]? Message-ID: <20110814232837.GL20653@prunille.vinc17.org> Mail-Followup-To: zsh-users@zsh.org References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Mailer-Info: http://www.vinc17.net/mutt/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21-6194-vl-r44775 (2011-07-13) On 2011-08-14 18:46:53 -0400, TJ Luoma wrote: > If there any reason to prefer > > if [[ -o interactive ]] > > rather than > > if [[ -o login ]] > > ? > > Are they two ways of saying the same thing? If not, could someone > explain the difference? Not all interactive shells are login shells. Typically, when one opens a terminal, one just gets an interactive shell (though this can be configurable). -- Vincent Lefèvre - Web: 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arénaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)