From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 10 15:30:35 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 959B2F65 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:30:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com (mail-oi0-f49.google.com [209.85.218.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62BD194E for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:30:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f49.google.com with SMTP id a3so6788165oib.8 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:30:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=A7hxoNz7ANyzHCOWLcYfSuLmjtTIdtfoQ0VvYOO4jrI=; b=fvum5TaZyq53nn5Kfna0VVg8uVySEi0BqyUfGmDRO8Kz5kDJ38axww6ri+XGtW2BKX 0j6Gh5oE7UMtSjO4Z0Q30Ln63KMT91Tb2WhXKsvLzsRgRFAN9i/WvLCQj+H9lZcw05HC tjcj+Aw6mMscz+kd3f/JNn3NRMRsSE8tnjdPB2wL/6L6K+kZvNNhCEJVr9HCg3F9eMc+ RJT4YCtkGyVxqY/ZV7kMagH08IiSp5poQ2BBHYvNHYKWZZOV8e+Dt3tj2a0NS3yUNmlu R6E72OXaROiS99Ni70HLWqMajTwdQtv3/oUw5xZKMr2rXjeih4DWlCIzOoTFPi6giFpR L6YA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlZCZQRRThA6ZpE1H5ryZV8rGumdRpucgfftmZEJZs/gf7L+2tOFw9eblwM7N8SOpdQdpmg MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.94.41 with SMTP id cz9mr2899269oeb.54.1412955033189; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:30:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.220.134 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:30:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5437FB8B.9080008@hiwaay.net> References: <5437FB8B.9080008@hiwaay.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 08:30:33 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: sh man page .... From: Michael Sierchio To: FreeBSD Questions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:30:35 -0000 On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:30 AM, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: >.....I had a bunch of shell scripts written to use Linux > sh, which was in fact bash, which means it had a superset of the arithmetic > operators that traditional sh had. When I use these scripts under sh under > FBSD 9.3, they largely work, though there are some minor differences (empty > strings evaluate to zero (0) under bash, error under sh). The man page for > sh doesn't reflect some of these compatibilities/incompatibilities, Nor should it. The Bourne Shell is the Bourne Shell, is adequately documented by the man page, and warnings about incompatibility are the responsibility of those who foist off bash as sh. You're blaming your own bad habit on others. :-) - M