File globbing pattern, !(*example), behaves differently in bash script than it does in bash shell





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{
margin-bottom:0;
}








5















The following works when pasted directly into my bash terminal (I call bash explicitly, bash version: 4.4.19(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu))



for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done


This command echoes back all of the txt files that do not have 'example' in the filename.



But when I convert this into a script called temp.sh, chmod +x temp.sh and call it by ./temp.sh:



#!/usr/bin/env bash

for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done



I get the following error:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ ./temp.sh 
./temp.sh: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token `('
./temp.sh: line 3: `for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do'


I fail to understand the problem here. Why is it doing exactly what I want in the shell but not in the script.



Edit (to answer panki's question):



The difference between when env is called in shell/terminal and when env is called in shell/script:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ diff example_myshell.txt example_called_script.txt 
5a6
> _=/usr/bin/env
36,37d36
< TERM=xterm-256color
< SHELL=/bin/bash
38a38,39
> SHELL=/bin/bash
> TERM=xterm-256color
45c46
< PYENV_SHELL=bash
---
> SHLVL=4
47c48
< SHLVL=3
---
> PYENV_SHELL=bash
61d61
< _=/usr/bin/env










share|improve this question



























  • Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

    – Panki
    May 27 at 9:56











  • Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

    – Dean Kayton
    May 27 at 10:03


















5















The following works when pasted directly into my bash terminal (I call bash explicitly, bash version: 4.4.19(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu))



for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done


This command echoes back all of the txt files that do not have 'example' in the filename.



But when I convert this into a script called temp.sh, chmod +x temp.sh and call it by ./temp.sh:



#!/usr/bin/env bash

for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done



I get the following error:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ ./temp.sh 
./temp.sh: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token `('
./temp.sh: line 3: `for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do'


I fail to understand the problem here. Why is it doing exactly what I want in the shell but not in the script.



Edit (to answer panki's question):



The difference between when env is called in shell/terminal and when env is called in shell/script:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ diff example_myshell.txt example_called_script.txt 
5a6
> _=/usr/bin/env
36,37d36
< TERM=xterm-256color
< SHELL=/bin/bash
38a38,39
> SHELL=/bin/bash
> TERM=xterm-256color
45c46
< PYENV_SHELL=bash
---
> SHLVL=4
47c48
< SHLVL=3
---
> PYENV_SHELL=bash
61d61
< _=/usr/bin/env










share|improve this question



























  • Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

    – Panki
    May 27 at 9:56











  • Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

    – Dean Kayton
    May 27 at 10:03














5












5








5








The following works when pasted directly into my bash terminal (I call bash explicitly, bash version: 4.4.19(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu))



for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done


This command echoes back all of the txt files that do not have 'example' in the filename.



But when I convert this into a script called temp.sh, chmod +x temp.sh and call it by ./temp.sh:



#!/usr/bin/env bash

for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done



I get the following error:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ ./temp.sh 
./temp.sh: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token `('
./temp.sh: line 3: `for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do'


I fail to understand the problem here. Why is it doing exactly what I want in the shell but not in the script.



Edit (to answer panki's question):



The difference between when env is called in shell/terminal and when env is called in shell/script:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ diff example_myshell.txt example_called_script.txt 
5a6
> _=/usr/bin/env
36,37d36
< TERM=xterm-256color
< SHELL=/bin/bash
38a38,39
> SHELL=/bin/bash
> TERM=xterm-256color
45c46
< PYENV_SHELL=bash
---
> SHLVL=4
47c48
< SHLVL=3
---
> PYENV_SHELL=bash
61d61
< _=/usr/bin/env










share|improve this question
















The following works when pasted directly into my bash terminal (I call bash explicitly, bash version: 4.4.19(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu))



for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done


This command echoes back all of the txt files that do not have 'example' in the filename.



But when I convert this into a script called temp.sh, chmod +x temp.sh and call it by ./temp.sh:



#!/usr/bin/env bash

for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do
echo "${filename}"
done



I get the following error:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ ./temp.sh 
./temp.sh: line 3: syntax error near unexpected token `('
./temp.sh: line 3: `for filename in /home/dean/Downloads/!(*example).txt; do'


I fail to understand the problem here. Why is it doing exactly what I want in the shell but not in the script.



Edit (to answer panki's question):



The difference between when env is called in shell/terminal and when env is called in shell/script:



dean@dean-thinkpad-p52s:~/Downloads$ diff example_myshell.txt example_called_script.txt 
5a6
> _=/usr/bin/env
36,37d36
< TERM=xterm-256color
< SHELL=/bin/bash
38a38,39
> SHELL=/bin/bash
> TERM=xterm-256color
45c46
< PYENV_SHELL=bash
---
> SHLVL=4
47c48
< SHLVL=3
---
> PYENV_SHELL=bash
61d61
< _=/usr/bin/env







bash shell-script wildcards bash-expansion






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 27 at 10:04







Dean Kayton

















asked May 27 at 9:53









Dean KaytonDean Kayton

535 bronze badges




535 bronze badges
















  • Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

    – Panki
    May 27 at 9:56











  • Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

    – Dean Kayton
    May 27 at 10:03



















  • Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

    – Panki
    May 27 at 9:56











  • Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

    – Dean Kayton
    May 27 at 10:03

















Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

– Panki
May 27 at 9:56





Does it work if you source the script? Is the bash returned by env the same as your shell?

– Panki
May 27 at 9:56













Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

– Dean Kayton
May 27 at 10:03





Sourcing the script works, but I need it to work when calling the script. I don't know if I follow your second question but I have included the difference of when env is called in script and when it is called in shell.

– Dean Kayton
May 27 at 10:03










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















13
















The !(...) Korn shell extended operator is only available in bash when you turn the extglob option on (it is off by default).



You may have extglob turned on in your interactive shell via ~/.bashrc or other initialization file, but notice that those files are not sourced when running scripts, and that option is not inherited from the calling shell (unless the BASHOPTS variable in the environment, but it would be a bad idea to have it there).



Explicitly turning it on with



shopt -s extglob


at the beginning of your script should work.



Notice that the shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line which wasn't already parsed. This means that you cannot use shopt -s extglob like set -f, to only turn the extended patterns on in a subshell:



# this won't work
(
shopt -s extglob
echo !(no such file)
)


You'd have to do something like:



(
shopt -s extglob
eval 'echo !(no such file)'
)





share|improve this answer























  • 1





    @DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    May 27 at 10:16













  • I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

    – Dean Kayton
    May 28 at 8:40






  • 2





    That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 8:52











  • Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 9:19








  • 2





    Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

    – mosvy
    May 29 at 21:02















Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});















draft saved

draft discarded
















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f521287%2ffile-globbing-pattern-example-behaves-differently-in-bash-script-than-it-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









13
















The !(...) Korn shell extended operator is only available in bash when you turn the extglob option on (it is off by default).



You may have extglob turned on in your interactive shell via ~/.bashrc or other initialization file, but notice that those files are not sourced when running scripts, and that option is not inherited from the calling shell (unless the BASHOPTS variable in the environment, but it would be a bad idea to have it there).



Explicitly turning it on with



shopt -s extglob


at the beginning of your script should work.



Notice that the shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line which wasn't already parsed. This means that you cannot use shopt -s extglob like set -f, to only turn the extended patterns on in a subshell:



# this won't work
(
shopt -s extglob
echo !(no such file)
)


You'd have to do something like:



(
shopt -s extglob
eval 'echo !(no such file)'
)





share|improve this answer























  • 1





    @DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    May 27 at 10:16













  • I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

    – Dean Kayton
    May 28 at 8:40






  • 2





    That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 8:52











  • Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 9:19








  • 2





    Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

    – mosvy
    May 29 at 21:02


















13
















The !(...) Korn shell extended operator is only available in bash when you turn the extglob option on (it is off by default).



You may have extglob turned on in your interactive shell via ~/.bashrc or other initialization file, but notice that those files are not sourced when running scripts, and that option is not inherited from the calling shell (unless the BASHOPTS variable in the environment, but it would be a bad idea to have it there).



Explicitly turning it on with



shopt -s extglob


at the beginning of your script should work.



Notice that the shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line which wasn't already parsed. This means that you cannot use shopt -s extglob like set -f, to only turn the extended patterns on in a subshell:



# this won't work
(
shopt -s extglob
echo !(no such file)
)


You'd have to do something like:



(
shopt -s extglob
eval 'echo !(no such file)'
)





share|improve this answer























  • 1





    @DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    May 27 at 10:16













  • I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

    – Dean Kayton
    May 28 at 8:40






  • 2





    That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 8:52











  • Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 9:19








  • 2





    Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

    – mosvy
    May 29 at 21:02
















13














13










13









The !(...) Korn shell extended operator is only available in bash when you turn the extglob option on (it is off by default).



You may have extglob turned on in your interactive shell via ~/.bashrc or other initialization file, but notice that those files are not sourced when running scripts, and that option is not inherited from the calling shell (unless the BASHOPTS variable in the environment, but it would be a bad idea to have it there).



Explicitly turning it on with



shopt -s extglob


at the beginning of your script should work.



Notice that the shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line which wasn't already parsed. This means that you cannot use shopt -s extglob like set -f, to only turn the extended patterns on in a subshell:



# this won't work
(
shopt -s extglob
echo !(no such file)
)


You'd have to do something like:



(
shopt -s extglob
eval 'echo !(no such file)'
)





share|improve this answer















The !(...) Korn shell extended operator is only available in bash when you turn the extglob option on (it is off by default).



You may have extglob turned on in your interactive shell via ~/.bashrc or other initialization file, but notice that those files are not sourced when running scripts, and that option is not inherited from the calling shell (unless the BASHOPTS variable in the environment, but it would be a bad idea to have it there).



Explicitly turning it on with



shopt -s extglob


at the beginning of your script should work.



Notice that the shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line which wasn't already parsed. This means that you cannot use shopt -s extglob like set -f, to only turn the extended patterns on in a subshell:



# this won't work
(
shopt -s extglob
echo !(no such file)
)


You'd have to do something like:



(
shopt -s extglob
eval 'echo !(no such file)'
)






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 28 at 12:54









Stéphane Chazelas

336k58 gold badges656 silver badges1035 bronze badges




336k58 gold badges656 silver badges1035 bronze badges










answered May 27 at 10:02









mosvymosvy

17.6k2 gold badges24 silver badges55 bronze badges




17.6k2 gold badges24 silver badges55 bronze badges











  • 1





    @DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    May 27 at 10:16













  • I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

    – Dean Kayton
    May 28 at 8:40






  • 2





    That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 8:52











  • Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 9:19








  • 2





    Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

    – mosvy
    May 29 at 21:02
















  • 1





    @DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    May 27 at 10:16













  • I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

    – Dean Kayton
    May 28 at 8:40






  • 2





    That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 8:52











  • Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

    – mosvy
    May 28 at 9:19








  • 2





    Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

    – mosvy
    May 29 at 21:02










1




1





@DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

– Stéphane Chazelas
May 27 at 10:16







@DeanKayton, the (confusingly named) shopt command and the extglob option are "standard" in bash, not in sh. If you want a sh equivalent, you can always do for f in /path/to/*.txt; do case ${f##*/} in (*example.txt) continue; esac; ...; done

– Stéphane Chazelas
May 27 at 10:16















I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

– Dean Kayton
May 28 at 8:40





I made the mistake of putting shopt -s extglob command immediately before the !(...) Korn shell extended operator was needed. This did not work at all, the command works when it is on the first line of the script. Can you comment as to why that is the case?

– Dean Kayton
May 28 at 8:40




2




2





That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

– mosvy
May 28 at 8:52





That's a bug in bash. shopt -s extglob only has effect beginning with the next line. There's really nothing you can do about it, than putting them on separate lines.

– mosvy
May 28 at 8:52













Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

– mosvy
May 28 at 9:19







Notice that the extglob patterns in bash are not really like those from ksh93; you cannot write something like touch bar baar baaar baaaar; echo b{2,3}(a)r to do regex-like quantifiers.

– mosvy
May 28 at 9:19






2




2





Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

– mosvy
May 29 at 21:02







Yeah, you cannot turn it on in a function, because a function gets parsed as a single unit, just like the (...) subshell from my example. (And btw, the shopt options, unlike the set options, cannot be made local to the function with local -, anyways). Another similar quirk/bug is with the failglob option -- a failed glob will zap the whole line/parsing unit, not just the command it's used in, and not even an eval will help with it ;-) (shopt -s failglob; eval 'echo hehe*'; echo DONE)

– mosvy
May 29 at 21:02





















draft saved

draft discarded



















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f521287%2ffile-globbing-pattern-example-behaves-differently-in-bash-script-than-it-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

Bunad