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

Re: LSB spec included commands



type is a shell built in for bash
ksh93 pdksh ksh88 and zsh, but it is not present, for
what i know on csh nor tcsh.
I agree that "which "is a better choice as it is a Unix command, and
has a consolidated tradition behind, and is mutch more flexible and usable
with command line.

Luigi Genoni

On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Rob Helmer wrote:


> "which" is more suitable for shell scripts than "type" ( ex.
> I can just say "ls `which ls`" ). "which" is often cited
> in manuals and is probably more known in the UNIX user
> community.
>
> "which" is also a UNIX command, while "type" is just in the
> shell ( bash, maybe others ).
>
> The additions look good, "fuser" is indispensable ;)
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rob Helmer
> Namodn
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 08:13:19AM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> > I propose making the following changes to the included commands list
> > in the LSB database.
> >
> > remove:
> >
> >   compress ("gzip" instead)
> >   uncompress ("gunzip" instead)
> >   uudecode (not needed)
> >   uuencode (not needed)
> >   which ("type" instead, not standardized)
> >
> > add:
> >
> >   awk
> >   basename
> >   batch
> >   cal
> >   cksum
> >   dd
> >   expand
> >   fuser
> >   logname
> >   nice
> >   nl
> >   nohup
> >   od
> >   pathchk
> >   pr
> >   sendmail
> >   sort
> >   time
> >   tty
> >   wc
> >   zcat (gzip)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-spec-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> > with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-spec-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org
>



Reply to: