On Thu, 27 Nov 1997, Adrian Bridgett wrote:
> There are alot of scripts which use unnecessary bashisms. Apart from complex
> scripts most of these can be easily changed to conform to the POSIX shell.
> This has the added advantage of meaning that those who want to can use ash
> as /bin/sh and reap the benefits of improved performance.
> To this end we really need a short document which details the differences,
> the "right" way to do things and the definite "No-No"s. Maybe this should
> go into the packaging manual, but initially it is probably better to have it
> seperate as it would change quite a bit at the start.
This is an excellent idea! As you probably know, it's planned to change
policy so that /bin/sh can be any POSIX compatible shell and every is
encouraged to change his/her scripts to use that instead of /bin/bash.
So, we could definitely need some documentation about the differences!
(Most people will probably install "ash" for /bin/sh, so you might want to
list differences between ash and the POSIX shells as well--if there are
-- Christian Schwarz
Don't know Perl? email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Visit PGP-fp: 8F 61 EB 6D CF 23 CA D7 34 05 14 5C C8 DC 22 BA
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .
- From: Adrian Bridgett <firstname.lastname@example.org>