Hello Björn!
25 Nov 2014 05:27, Björn Felten wrote to All:
BF> I've always found it hard to understand the underlying thought behind
BF> the original error levels from the old MakeNl. And it seems like we
BF> are trying to maintain those even in our new version.
if we change them scripts would fail
BF> Alas, let's try not to break any batch files from 20 years ago, but
BF> really?
+1
BF> 0 = Process mode - no errors encountered
BF> 1 = Process mode - no fatal errors encountered
BF> 2 = Process mode - one or more fatal errors encountered
BF> 3 = Test mode - no errors encountered
BF> 4 = Test mode - no fatal errors encountered
BF> 5 = Test mode - one or more fatal errors encountered
BF> 254 = MakeNL aborted - I/O error
BF> 255 = MakeNL aborted - Control file error
feel free to not use return codes :)
echo "war" && echo "done"
BF> Why the separate, otherwise identical, levels for process mode and
BF> for test mode?
its not same test
BF> Anyway, we can leave that be -- even if I doubt that there are that
BF> many systems out there that actually uses those error levels -- but
BF> one level I would like is for "Unchanged output file will NOT be
BF> submitted".
bad for daily updates
BF> When eventually the output file is changed, I want to know, so I
BF> can delete the old one (that at least for us in zone 2 has a different
BF> file extension on a regional level) and hatch out the new one.
check for not zerro return codes there would be error, so dont delete source,
but if zerro return its updated, what ever dont know if bash on windows changes
that
Regards Benny
... there can only be one way of life, and it works :)
--- Msged/LNX 6.2.0 (Linux/3.17.3-gentoo (i686))
* Origin: duggi.junc.org where qico is waiting (2:230/0)
|