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

Re: [PATCH] latest ash has broken 'echo' command

On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 03:40:42PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> No if the options come from a single standard. There are mandatory features
> and optional ones in every standard. I think that implementing all of them
> is a good thing. The only thing left is how to let the, in our case, script
> writer know that this or that feature is actually supported. An environment
> variable to that effect would do.

But you can't implement all of them.  Adding options actually breaks some
scripts that assume that there are no options.

> Either way, the statement that they need to work with all shells, doesn't
> prevent one from supporting off the standard features *if* they don't break
> the standard, right? After all, we are talking about features that are used
> by thousands of programmers worldwide making them a de-facto standard that,
> in fact, doesn't contradict POSIX.

But nobody actually writes ash scripts.  The only reason that we have ash at
all is so that it can serve as /bin/sh.  And that's assuming that people write
#!/bin/sh scripts that are POSIX compliant.  Otherwise it's just unworkable.
Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email:  Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

Reply to: