From owner-freebsd-current Mon Oct 26 20:41:44 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA08450 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:41:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from galois.boolean.net (galois.boolean.net [209.133.111.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA08445 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:41:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org) Received: from gypsy (galois.boolean.net [209.133.111.74]) by galois.boolean.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id EAA01402; Tue, 27 Oct 1998 04:47:36 GMT (envelope-from Kurt@OpenLDAP.Org) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981026205249.009cd860@localhost> X-Sender: guru@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 20:52:49 -0800 To: Chuck Robey From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" Subject: Re: Changing sh for compatibility sake Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.5.32.19981026163758.009dd550@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Chuck wrote: >I'm sorry, that's not true. Ask anyone who writes shell scripts that >install software (or perform any necessarily portable function) across >multiple platforms. sh is the shell to use ONLY BECAUSE it's the lowest >common denominator. Why else would they use the dumbest shell? I've written numerous system/install sh scripts. But it's not to one specific implementation, its many. It seems like every OS has it's own variant of sh. I do not know of any version of sh that can reliable used as a golden target sh. Each and very implementation of sh has its quirks that have to be dealt with. FreeBSD sh definitely has its, as do the others. Any change will likely cause problems in some existing scripts. Also, any change will cause developers to deal with additional portability issues. This is life. Most multiple platform sh developers have already adapted to specific quicks of popular sh implementations. Changing from one to another should not be that big of a deal. I suspect a few FreeBSD-only sh scripts will choke. Don't change sh for compatibility sake, our scripts are already compatible! Do change for functionality sake, we'll adapt as necessary. Kurt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message