On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:39:37 -0000, "Mika Fischer"
<email address hidden> said:
> So I propose to set -v or set +v based on the value of
> $BASH_COMPLETION_DEBUG, but restore the original setting at the end of
> the script.
>
> This will make it possible to debug without being overwhelmed by
> output from bash_completion or also debug bash_completion selectively.
>
> What do you think?
>
> A version that does this can be found here:
> http://git.zoopnet.de/bash-completion.git?a=blob_plain;f=bash_completion;hb=601bb9cdd810467b5ce2c4a2c672f68ba4b43e55
>
> Let me know whether this works for you.
I don't run unstable code on my production system but it certainly looks
reasonable.
Perhaps you want to update the comments to indicate that this is no
longer identical to Ian's version 200603whatever, too ...
/* era */
--
If this were a real .signature, it would suck less. Well, maybe not.
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 12:39:37 -0000, "Mika Fischer" N_DEBUG, but restore the original setting at the end of git.zoopnet. de/bash- completion. git?a=blob_ plain;f= bash_completion ;hb=601bb9cdd81 0467b5ce2c4a2c6 72f68ba4b43e55
<email address hidden> said:
> So I propose to set -v or set +v based on the value of
> $BASH_COMPLETIO
> the script.
>
> This will make it possible to debug without being overwhelmed by
> output from bash_completion or also debug bash_completion selectively.
>
> What do you think?
>
> A version that does this can be found here:
> http://
>
> Let me know whether this works for you.
I don't run unstable code on my production system but it certainly looks
reasonable.
Perhaps you want to update the comments to indicate that this is no
longer identical to Ian's version 200603whatever, too ...
/* era */
--
If this were a real .signature, it would suck less. Well, maybe not.