Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 10:19:56 +0200 From: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Shells Message-ID: <20000420101956.D14732@cons.org> In-Reply-To: <20000417011641.C3064@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.ORG on Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 01:16:41AM -0700 References: <200004160306.VAA30436@harmony.village.org> <27309.955883220@zippy.cdrom.com> <20000417011641.C3064@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In <20000417011641.C3064@dragon.nuxi.com>, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sun, Apr 16, 2000 at 04:07:00AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > > sh scripts run fine on bash and I'll certainly challenge anyone to > > find me a /bin/sh script which behaves differently when fed to our > > 5.0-current ash shell vs bash 2.03. > > Funny that last time I proposed to replace ash with pdksh, way to many > people claimed all our /etc/ scripts would break. Now people feel that > our /etc/ scripts are fully executable by a shell other than ash. Our /etc/rc (except the -T stuff for local/etc/rc.d) is certainly executable by bash2. But bash2 is an almost bugfree shell, while pdksh and zsh are not, so you can't transfer the claim the way you did. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ BSD User Group Hamburg, Germany http://www.bsdhh.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000420101956.D14732>