Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy
In gmane.linux.debian.devel.general Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 18:15 -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
>> A builtin ls might be a good idea for disaster recovery shells,
>> though zsh-static does not have it. posh is not intended to be
>> such a shell, nor to be particularly useful interactively.
>> Since I cannot think of a legitimate reason for anyone to use
>> ls in a shell script, I think it would add little value.
> Well, the goal was (in part) to catch scripts which use non-Posix
> features of echo and test; why are non-Posix features of ls not an
> issue?
<quote>
Since I cannot think of a legitimate reason for anyone to use
ls in a shell script, I think it would add little value.
<unquote>
cu andreas
Reply to: