1 |
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:58:24 -0500 Randy Barlow wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:52:10 +0100 |
3 |
> Hinnerk van Bruinehsen <h.v.bruinehsen@×××××××××.de> wrote: |
4 |
> > There are some other options of "nesting" as well. You can use |
5 |
> > backticks "`" or $(...) to run a command "inside" another. An example |
6 |
> > would be emerge `qlist -CI x11-drivers` (or the equivalent emerge |
7 |
> > $(qlist -CI x11-drivers) ) . This would run "qlist -CI |
8 |
> > x11-drivers" (lists installed packages of the category x11-drivers) |
9 |
> > and use this output for emerge (which will effectively result in |
10 |
> > reinstalling every package from the x11-drivers category). |
11 |
> |
12 |
> As I understand it, the $(...) syntax is the preferred way of nesting, |
13 |
> as opposed to backticks. I think this may be due to backticks requiring |
14 |
> some special escaping that the $(...) syntax does not require. I |
15 |
> attempted a brief search for supporting information, but didn't find a |
16 |
> definitive source to back up my claims :) |
17 |
|
18 |
The reason for $(...) being preferred is simple: you can nest |
19 |
$($($(...))), but you can't nest `...`. Deep nesting is quite useful |
20 |
indeed. |
21 |
|
22 |
Best regards, |
23 |
Andrew Savchenko |