[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Function visibility
From: |
Bob Proulx |
Subject: |
Re: Function visibility |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:57:16 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) |
Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> To work around that, you have to do things like this in
> /etc/profile:
> ...
> And do something similar in your ~/.profile for your ~/.bashrc.
While that is normal to do to configure interactive sessions the
original question was where should shell functions be placed for use
by scripts. I think the above answer is a good answer but to a
different question. It reads as if this is a suggestion to place
shell functions in a bashrc file and I wanted to clarify that that is
not the case.
Non-interactive scripts should not normally be reading system or
personal bashrc customization files. Putting a function in a bashrc
would still not make it visible to scripts. This of the problems that
scripts would have if user's aliases for ls='ls -F --color=always' and
rm='rm -i' were seen by scripts. Script authors need a known stable
run environment.
In summary shell functions should be defined in the script or defined
in a file sourced by the script.
Bob
- Function visibility, retiredff, 2007/10/01
- Re: Function visibility, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/10/02
- Re: Function visibility,
Bob Proulx <=
- Message not available
- Re: Function visibility, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/10/02
- Re: Function visibility, Bob Proulx, 2007/10/02
- Message not available
- Re: Function visibility, Stephane Chazelas, 2007/10/02
- Re: Function visibility, Matthew Woehlke, 2007/10/02
- Re: Function visibility, Bob Proulx, 2007/10/02