From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 10 15:35:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81B7FE1 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:35:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fly.hiwaay.net (fly.hiwaay.net [216.180.54.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C5FAA10 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 15:35:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kabini1.local (rbn1-216-180-19-37.adsl.hiwaay.net [216.180.19.37]) (authenticated bits=0) by fly.hiwaay.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/fly) with ESMTP id s9AFZYZr016270 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 10 Oct 2014 10:35:35 -0500 Message-ID: <5437FE3D.8070808@hiwaay.net> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 10:41:49 -0500 From: "William A. Mahaffey III" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD Questions Subject: Re: sh man page .... References: <5437FB8B.9080008@hiwaay.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 15:35:36 -0000 On 10/10/14 10:30, Michael Sierchio wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > Well !!!! The sh man page is mute on the fact that an empty string is an error in arithmetic or logical evaluations, which is an omission irrespective of what bash does :-). I presume that converting Linux users to FBSD users is an agenda item here (maybe my error), thus suitably complete man pages should be an important goal, I would think. I didn't think converting from Linux to FBSD was/is a bad habit ;-) .... -- William A. Mahaffey III ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The M1 Garand is without doubt the finest implement of war ever devised by man." -- Gen. George S. Patton Jr.