>
> It's a matter of "consistency". The script began #!/bin/bash and so a
> direct shell invocation should _also_ use the same command.
Good point. I'll try to keep that in mind.
Thank you,
Tim
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Stephen Harris <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 09:00:06PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> > Once upon a time, Stephen Harris <lists@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
>
> > > You should use "bash -x" ("bash" and not "sh" because sh may not be
> bash
> > > everywhere; eg Ubuntu; "-x" and not "+x" because "-x" means "turn on
> debug"
> > > but "+x" means "turn _off_ debug")
> >
> > Unless you have specific bashisms (which I don't think the original did,
> > and you should mostly avoid in scripts), sh -x will be fine.
>
> It's a matter of "consistency". The script began #!/bin/bash and so a
> direct shell invocation should _also_ use the same command.
>
> --
>
> rgds
> Stephen
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
--
GPG me!!
gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys F186197B
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
