Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!AUREL.CALTECH.EDU!bfox
From: bfox@AUREL.CALTECH.EDU (Brian Fox)
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Positional parameters lost when setting flags (with fix)
Message-ID: <8907201748.AA14517@aurel.caltech.edu>
Date: 20 Jul 89 17:48:19 GMT
References: <173@titania.warwick.ac.uk>
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Reply-To: bfox@aurel.caltech.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
Lines: 39


   Date: 19 Jul 89 18:27:34 GMT
   From: mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv@uunet.uu.net  (Rob McMahon)
   Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK
   Sender: bug-bash-request@prep.ai.mit.edu

   BTW.  Could Brian Fox ack this please, I've a sneaky suspicion these
   bug reports aren't getting to him.  I'm posting them to gnu.bash.bug,
   should I be mailing them to some other address (unknown to me)
   instead ?  Should this group in fact be moderated with some mailing
   list address as the moderator ?  If I'm doing things wrong, could
   someone else let me know.

   Thanks,

   Rob

To the list in general:

If the mail doesn't bounce, you can be sure it got to me.  You may not
get a response from me because the question has already been answered,
the bug has already been fixed, the bug does not really exist (i.e., you
ported Bash incorrectly, or you are complaining about an unsupported
port), or worst of all, you are complaining about a bug that was
introduced by installing third party patches as soon as they appear on
this list.

It is almost always true that the fix I make to the Bash source is not
the same as a posted patch, and sometimes, it is so drastically
different as to make it ridiculous to consider posting diffs to the
list.

All of the bug reports I recieve are read, and are most welcome, for
they help me to make Bash more solid and reliable day by day.

I thank you all for your patience while using these Beta release
versions of Bash.

Brian Fox