[ALUG] kubuntu apt-get not installed

(Ted Harding) ted.harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk
Wed Jun 13 08:37:53 BST 2007

On 13-Jun-07 07:02:04, Brett Parker wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 01:08:13AM +0100, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
>> On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 00:54 +0100, ted.harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk wrote:
>> > ('set', by the way, should work regardless of your PATH
>> > since it is a shell command and not a binary. On the other
>> > hand, if your PATH is empty, then 'echo $PATH' will not
>> > work, since 'echo' is in /bin. Nor will 'env', since it
>> > is also in /bin)).
>> > 
>> A good point Ted !
>> of course if the path is the problem echo $PATH won't work 'set'
> is the way forward
> Errr, echo is a bash builtin, too (and has been for quite some time) -
> so, it *should* work - I don't know what half arsed shell Ted is using,
> but most of them have echo builtin as far as I'm aware.

True enough -- now that you point it out and I check it in "man bash".

I'd been going on the result of "which echo" (--> /bin/echo) and on
a mind-set established long before bash was born.

So, indeed, echo $PATH whould work if bash is working, and is of
course handier than picking through the output of 'set'.

It follows (on this tangential thread) that you should also refer
to "help echo" (for the shell one) rather than "man echo" (for
the /bin/echo one), since there are (on my system at least) slight
differences between these two implementations.

E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <ted.harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861
Date: 13-Jun-07                                       Time: 08:37:46
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

More information about the main mailing list