David, et al -- ...and then David C. Rankin said... % % On 3/20/21 9:47 AM, Vojt??ch Zeisek wrote: % > else. C may run when A is true. % > ^--------------^ SC1090: Can't follow non- % % This is okay here, since you must return true no matter what happens to % prevent a false being taken as an error and impacting shell startup. Again, I disagree. This is probably a religious^Wphilosophical difference, but IMHO it is better to fail upon a failure, even if that means that your login is interrupted and you have to fix it, than to quietly mask the failure. The trivial unset TARGETDIR # something failed; this is empty cd $TARGETDIR rm -rf * is one obvious example. There are many other less-obvious ways to screw up almost as badly. Realistically, this || true isn't even necessary; either you're the type to set -e and die on a failure or you aren't and the failure goes unnoticed. For those who DO care, though, this structure masks an error that would have been caught. % % So even if C runs returning true after A returns true -- that's fine. Sure, that's fine -- unless you need to know that B returned false. % % -- % David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. % Have a great day! :-D -- David T-G See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/email/ See http://justpickone.org/davidtg/tofu.txt