Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:46:00 +0200 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: Martin Stromberg Message-Id: <7458-Fri27Oct2000114600+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5h CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: <200010270805.KAA00023@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> (message from Martin Stromberg on Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:05:31 +0200 (MET DST)) Subject: Re: Bash 2.04 beta 6a References: <200010270805 DOT KAA00023 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > From: Martin Stromberg > Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:05:31 +0200 (MET DST) > > bash$ perl5 -e 'system("bash -c \"echo \$-\n\"");' > s > > Hence perl's bash invocation is non-interactive. I'm not sure this is the correct way of testing this. The original command invoked ECHO differently ("echo #foo|"), which might be invoking the shell in some subtly different way, e.g. because it redirects the standard handles. I think you need to test the interactive/non-interactive aspect in the same way.