Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:08:23 -0400 From: Jerry <freebsd.user@seibercom.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Switched to Bash and Comparison of Shells Message-ID: <20100610150823.219c122c@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <44typa3hv7.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> References: <1276190395.5437.53.camel@jane.spg.more.net> <44typa3hv7.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:41:32 -0400 Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org> articulated: > bash (like most other sh-style shells) has no "which" builtin. You > end up running /usr/bin/which. bash (like most other sh-style > shells) does have a (rough) equivalent, which is "type" Personally, I have found the "command" equivalent quite adequate. I use a version of the following in all of my Bash scripts that require checking for the presents of another program. command -v command1 >/dev/null && echo "command1 Found In \$PATH" || echo "command1 Not Found in \$PATH" -- Jerry FreeBSD.user@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ Sure you can trust the Government; ask any Indian.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100610150823.219c122c>