[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: /bin/sh != /bin/bash

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>         The only comment I have is that /bin/sh should be a POSIX
>  /bin/sh. If ash fills that requirement, then we should make sure it
>  works. (The POSIX requirement, IIRC, is going to be a part of the
>  open UNIX specification).
>         Unfortunately, I don't think that ash fits the bill. Any
>  system with a non-POSIX /bin/sh would be broken. Can we massage ash
>  into POSIX compliance (none of the readline/history stuff that bash
>  does is required).

I ported the NetBSD-current of 19970715 as our current ash.  AFAIK their
goal is POSIX compliance and the only problem that I'm aware of
currently is with "trap" understanding symbolic signal names which
shouldn't be hard to fix.
Debian GNU/Linux 1.3 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email:  Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://greathan.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://greathan.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: