From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Oct  1 17:21:23 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id RAA06866
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 1 Oct 1995 17:21:23 -0700
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA06855
          for <hackers@freefall.freebsd.org>; Sun, 1 Oct 1995 17:21:19 -0700
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA20655; Sun, 1 Oct 1995 17:15:06 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199510020015.RAA20655@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: /bin/sh thinks it's csh
To: taob@io.org (Brian Tao)
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 1995 17:15:06 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, kaleb@x.org, hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.91.951001162527.19034X-100000@trepan.io.org> from "Brian Tao" at Oct 1, 95 04:27:01 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 403       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>     So argv[0] is the name of the command ("echo") and argv[1] (or $1)
> is the first argument, which is "foo".  Why is it proper for POSIX sh
> to return the second argument, "bar"?  Is "foo" considered the command
> name in the above case?

echo is a builtin.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.