urgrue wrote: > > You could try something like: > > > > $ command1 && command2 && command3 > > Better would be command1 ; command2 ; command3, because then it won't > depend on the previous command coming out true. Well, whether or not it's better depends upon whether you want to conditionalise execution of one command upon success of the previous command. I find it far more common for scripts to use ";" when they really should have used "&&" than the converse. A particularly common case is "cd foo ; dosomething"; this should almost always be using "&&". -- Glynn Clements <glynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
