| 1 |
On Wednesday, October 13, 2010 03:08:24 Vaeth wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > for foo in ${ROOT}/etc/openvpn/*/local.conf; do |
| 4 |
> > > |
| 5 |
> > > [ -e ${foo} ] && bar ${foo} |
| 6 |
> > > |
| 7 |
> > > done |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > i'd say doing a loop is worse than a `ls` hack. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Why do you think so? No external program on which you must rely, |
| 12 |
> and if you put a "break" in there, the loop is just syntactical. |
| 13 |
> Here is another possibility if you do not need positional |
| 14 |
> parameters anymore: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> set -- "${ROOT}"/etc/openvpn/*/local.conf |
| 17 |
> if test -e "${1}" |
| 18 |
> then ... |
| 19 |
> fi |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> And if you do need, you can write a function: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Test2() { |
| 24 |
> test "${1}" "${2}" |
| 25 |
> } |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> if Test2 -e "${ROOT}"/etc/openvpn/*/local.conf |
| 28 |
> then ... |
| 29 |
> fi |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
relying on an external program to get a single line of readable code is better |
| 32 |
than multiple lines of code that attempt to do the same thing. your further |
| 33 |
examples here are even worse on many levels. |
| 34 |
-mike |
Archives