Subject: Re: make -j and failure modes
To: None <>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 12/11/2003 03:25:47
>> you either make "(false)" behave differently from "false" (POSIX
>> behaviour, exemplified by Bash)
> Yes, and I have no problem with that one - one assumes that if the ()
> are added, that's done for a reason.

Yes, but not necessarily for _that_ reason.  I've actually been annoyed
by this: I've had to add () so that something (usually I/O redirection)
can affect a number of commands, but have had the "push it into a
subshell" semantics () produces get in the way.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B