Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy
Bruce Sass <email@example.com> writes:
> Since the file was used to provide both the bash builtin and the
> standalone test, and -a is undocumented in the test manpage, it is most
> likely a bash feature... why not use -e, which is documented and
> available in dash, bash, and test?
That's not the -a that we're talking about; that's the unary -a and we're
talking about the binary -a. Use of -a as a binary operator is part of
the XSI extension of POSIX/SUS and is definitely not specific to bash. I
don't know enough about shell history to know who came up with it
initially, but it would surprise me if it were bash.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>