X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:21:32 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: [BUG?] run.exe and pdflatex Message-ID: <20080110232132.GA24083@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <4786A6B7.40705@upb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4786A6B7.40705@upb.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com Note-from-DJ: This may be spam On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 12:13:59AM +0100, Sven K?hler wrote: >> bash -c "exec /bin/echo \$@" some arguments here >> >> and see what's printed; then read the bash man page for why this happens). > >Oh, that possibility was new to me. > >All i wonder, is why the "some" gets lost. Only "arguments here" is >printed. And actually i would like to argue, that "$@" instead of $@ >should be used. Because, as on linux, the arguments are taken to be argv[0 - 2]. bash -c "exec /bin/echo \"\$0\" \"\$@\"" will get you all of the arguments. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/