| 1 |
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 13:02:48 +0200 |
| 2 |
Alexander Skwar <listen@×××××××××××××××.name> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Dirk Heinrichs wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Am Dienstag, 25. Juli 2006 11:00 schrieb ext Arnau Bria: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >> I've seen a file named "[" in my /usr/bin ... |
| 8 |
> >> [...] |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> does any one know what could it be?¿ |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > It's the [ from "if [ condition ]; then ...", a shortcut for /usr/bin/test. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Nope, not correct. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> [09:39:58 vz6tml@dewup-ww02:~] $ type [ |
| 17 |
> [ is a shell builtin |
| 18 |
> [13:01:25 vz6tml@dewup-ww02:~] $ type test |
| 19 |
> test is a shell builtin |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> And actually /usr/bin/[ and /usr/bin/test aren't even the same: |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> [13:01:56 vz6tml@dewup-ww02:~] $ ls -la /usr/bin/{[,test} |
| 24 |
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 24852 27. Jun 09:34 /usr/bin/[ |
| 25 |
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 22784 27. Jun 09:34 /usr/bin/test |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> I wonder where the differences are. I would've expected that test and [ |
| 28 |
> were hardlinks. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
# /usr/bin/[ |
| 31 |
/usr/bin/[: missing ']' |
| 32 |
# /usr/bin/test |
| 33 |
<no output> |
| 34 |
# |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
You see? They cant be the same, because the closing "]" is needed by /usr/bin[ and not by /usr/bin/test |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Hagen |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives