[Linux-Anyway] Re: Update: Searched & searched for locale....
- From: Horror Vacui <horrorvacui@xxxxxxx>
- To: Linux-Anyway@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 21:48:32 +0100
On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 11:07:54 -0700 (PDT)
Meph wrote:
> Horror,
>
> > > Duh. It's all in the .bashrc. Once I'd created a .bashrc
> > > in root & added export LANG=en_GB, all was well...with local.
>
> > Please don't be offended by my saying this, but since sometimes
> > the obvious is obviously too obvious to be thought of:
>
> How could I be offended by a statement my lack of caffeine
> can't quite figure out?;-)
I love redundant repetitions, so it'll go through with me sometimes. I
could have said: "It's easiest to overlook the obvious" - but there are
no redundancies in that ;)
>
> > grep helps no end in finding lots of variables. Whenever I'm
> > puzzled as to where the hell something gets set from, I do a
> > recursive grep for it on /etc or $HOME. I guess a "grep -r LANG
> > /etc/*" would have put you on the right track immediately.
>
> Love grep, but I often wind up leaving something really
> important out of the query & I sit there waiting while grep does
> nothing. Why is it that sometimes one needs a " ." at the end of
> a query & sometimes not?
Tools like grep, find etc. are among those that have been there first in
UNIX - therefore, they're often quite difficult to figure out. The
syntax is something like grep [options] <expression> <file> (which
somewhat goes against my expectations - though there are no standards on
that, I'd rather expect it to be grep <file> <expression>, and my grep
errors are mostly due to that), so the " ." at the end of a query you're
referring to might very well be not part of the query, but the alias for
"current directory". Otherwise (if the query is enclosed in quotes" it
might be a part of a regexp, meaning "any character". I don't think that
grep takes a regexp as default, you have to use grep -e if you want to
use a regexp.
Apropos regexpen, I'm sure somebody knows how to negate a regexp. I know
that one can use ^ to negate within a range or a list (the thing
enclosed by []), and that one can use ! to negate withing an atom ({}),
but somehow I never managed to create a regexp matching lines *not*
containing a certain string (short of negating every character
one-by-one).
>
> > > Anybody with money to burn will easily find someone to tend
> > > the fire.
>
> > Hey! Nice quote.
>
> It's nice to have fortune again:-).
>
> --
> "A University without students is like an ointment without a
> fly."
> -Ed Nather, professor of astronomy at UT Austin
Fortune is nothing without a good set of quotes. You're lucky. There's
another good quote.
Cheers
--
Horror Vacui
Registered Linux user #257714
Go get yourself... counted: http://counter.li.org/
- and keep following the GNU.
To unsubcribe send e-mail with the word unsubscribe in the body to:
Linux-Anyway-Request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?body=unsubscribe
Other related posts:
