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



I ran VSC5.1.1L on bash shell and communicated the results to Mr. Chet
Ramey, the current maintainer of bash.  I got his observation below and I
don't know how to response.  Please feel free to response to him directly
if you want.

> I have looked at the failed tests in sh_0[4567] and I am not impressed
>with the test suite.  It seems to have been designed to verify that a
>machine which has ksh installed as /bin/sh is POSIX-conformant.  If
>they wanted a test to prove that ksh was POSIX-conformat, they could
>hardly have written a better one.
>The test suite is riddled with ksh-isms that are not POSIX:  `print',
>relying on the shell to perform arithmetic expansion on the arguments
>to `test's numeric operators, the fact that ksh doesn't include function
>bodies in the output of `set', etc.
>Many of the failed tests also call `sh' directly, which is probably not
>the shell you're testing.  It's a good way to see whether /bin/sh is
>POSIX-conformant, but not anything else.
>``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
>( ``Discere est Dolere'' -- chet)
>Chet Ramey, CWRU    chet@po.CWRU.Edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/

Andrew Pham

Reply to: