Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:

> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
> 
> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
> 
> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)

Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^

On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 04:27 Kagamin wrote:
> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
> > Oh I remember doing that too :) Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once. I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
> > 
> > Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
> > 
> > I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
> 
> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^

No. No. We must port Windows users to Linux. ;)

- Jonathan M Davis

Ew.  speak no blasphemy...

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Kagamin <spam@here.lot> wrote:

> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>
> > Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it
> anymore.
> >
> > Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
> >
> > I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
>
> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
>

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:

> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
> 
>> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
>> 
>> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
>> 
>> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
> 
> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^

Too much work! Just put

  alias test='./test'

in your .profile, and be happy. :)

Graham

Le Tue, 01 Nov 2011 18:23:52 +0000, Graham Fawcett a écrit :

> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
> 
>> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>> 
>>> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
>>> 
>>> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
>>> 
>>> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
>> 
>> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
> 
> Too much work! Just put
> 
>   alias test='./test'
> 
> in your .profile, and be happy. :)
> 
> Graham

Excellent :D

++

On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 18:23:52 Graham Fawcett wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
> > Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
> >> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
> >> 
> >> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
> >> 
> >> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
> > 
> > Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
> 
> Too much work! Just put
> 
>   alias test='./test'
> 
> in your .profile, and be happy. :)

Though if you don't get used to putting ./ in front of the names of binaries that you're running in the current directory, you're going to have other problems. The suggestion does fix the occasional screw-up with that particular command though.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 12:18:02 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 01, 2011 18:23:52 Graham Fawcett wrote:
>> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
>> > Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>> >> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
>> >> 
>> >> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
>> >> 
>> >> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
>> > 
>> > Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
>> 
>> Too much work! Just put
>> 
>>   alias test='./test'
>> 
>> in your .profile, and be happy. :)
> 
> Though if you don't get used to putting ./ in front of the names of binaries that you're running in the current directory, you're going to have other problems. The suggestion does fix the occasional screw-up with that particular command though.

Agreed; if you're going to use a system, learn how to use it properly.

Then again, there's no shame in using "training wheels" if you're an absolute beginner. When I started using Unix, I was glad that the "dir" command was available on the system I was using. (I'm not sure if it was a binary, or whether a kindly sysop had provided an alias to "ls" for us Windows users). Learning is a journey of many small steps!

Graham

On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:23:52 -0400, Graham Fawcett <fawcett@uwindsor.ca> wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
>
>> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>>
>>> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at
>>> least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it
>>> anymore.
>>>
>>> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why
>>> it overrides anything in your search path.
>>>
>>> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead
>>> of "test" :)
>>
>> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
>
> Too much work! Just put
>
>   alias test='./test'
>
> in your .profile, and be happy. :)

That's a cool trick :)

However, one issue, if you do happen to run any shell scripts where some a**hole insisted on using test instead of the [] form, this will cause problems.  There must be some way to check for an interactive shell...

-Steve

On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 07:56:19 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:23:52 -0400, Graham Fawcett <fawcett@uwindsor.ca> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 07:27:44 -0400, Kagamin wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh I remember doing that too :)  Don't feel bad, everyone does this at least once.  I hate that stupid test builtin, nobody ever uses it anymore.
>>>>
>>>> Note, it's not a command line tool, it's a shell builtin, which is why it overrides anything in your search path.
>>>>
>>>> I've since adopted the habit of calling test programs "testme" instead of "test" :)
>>>
>>> Huh, must port windows console to linux ^_^
>>
>> Too much work! Just put
>>
>>   alias test='./test'
>>
>> in your .profile, and be happy. :)
> 
> That's a cool trick :)
> 
> However, one issue, if you do happen to run any shell scripts where some a**hole insisted on using test instead of the [] form, this will cause problems.  There must be some way to check for an interactive shell...

I can't speak for all shells, but bash and zsh don't expand aliases when you run a script. From the bash manual:

  Aliases are not expanded when the shell is not interactive, unless the
  expand_aliases shell option is set using shopt (see the description  of
  shopt under SHELL BUILTIN COMMANDS below).

Cheers,
Graham

Jonathan M Davis Wrote:

> Though if you don't get used to putting ./ in front of the names of binaries that you're running in the current directory, you're going to have other problems. The suggestion does fix the occasional screw-up with that particular command though.

Seems like ./ tries to fix some sort of Namespace Pollution Hell when virtually every installed program ends up in path.