Re: Several reasons why debian should not use bash for /bin/sh
In article <[🔎] 35BFA57C.B0F08E7D@livenet.net>, Shaleh <shaleh@livenet.net>
wrote:
> A configure script from a program I downloaded called /bin/sh, yet it
> declared a function. To my knowledge bourne does not support functions.
Functions have been added to the Bourne shell in the early System V days
(sometime around SVR2 or so) and are now considered to be traditionally
supported by /bin/sh unless you're aiming for utmost compatibility with
1980s' XENIX systems and such.
> As to the ksh shell not being Bourne compliant I agree with you Chris in
> theory. However I have seen scripts work in sh and bash, but not in ksh
> (and yes sh was its own shell and not a link to bash).
Sure, if something collides with one of the extensions ksh or bash, or
POSIX sh for that matter has over the original sh. But here you enter
territory where scripts aren't even portable between different revisions
of the original, proprietary, copyright by AT&T Bourne shell.
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de
100+ SF Book Reviews: <URL:http://home.pages.de/~naddy/reviews/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: