Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh

To: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>, Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>
Cc: Debian Developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
From: Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 16:22:33 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] 19980803162233.28495@test.legislate.com>
Mail-followup-to: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>, Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>, Debian Developers <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.980803204216.7246A-100000@cantor.unex.es>; from Santiago Vila on Mon, Aug 03, 1998 at 08:51:17PM +0200
References: <[🔎] 87k94papgo.fsf@tiamat.datasync.com> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.980803204216.7246A-100000@cantor.unex.es>

Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> wrote:
> The fact that 90% of scripts *already* use /bin/sh and not /bin/bash
> *proves* that bash is not as essential (in the *second* meaning) as you

No, it does not.  Because bash is /bin/sh and we've not yet resolved
that issue.

-- 
Raul


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
  - From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

References:
- Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
  - From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@datasync.com>
- Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
  - From: Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>

Prev by Date: Re: blas, lapack, slatec,scalapack
Next by Date: Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
Previous by thread: Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
Next by thread: Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread