Re: PS1 value in shells
From: Thorsten Kampe (thorsten_at_thorstenkampe.de)
Date: 06/07/05
- Next message: William Park: "Re: How to rewrite with awk?"
- Previous message: su: "Re: printf statement"
- In reply to: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Next in thread: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Reply: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 18:04:59 +0100
* Sven Mascheck (2005-06-07 17:44 +0100)
> Thorsten Kampe wrote:
>> So invoking bash as "sh" is just a "shortcut" for
>> "conform to POSIX standard"?
>
> Well, you don't believe me but refuse to read bash(1).
I read it but I didn't understand it - or only at the fifth or sixth
time reading it.
>> Is the Bourne Shell actively developed? Does it have the many new
>> interactive features of modern shells like bash or zsh? Does it have
>> features for scripting like modern shells (arrays, etc.)?
>
> POSIX "sh" != Bourne Shell "sh"
Obviously. Confusingly. At least in bash where "sh" means "behave
POSIX correct" - contrary to zsh where "sh" means "emulate sh (Bourne
shell).
But I'm still convinced: there are no good reasons to run Bourne Shell
sh interactively. (While there may be good reasons to make a shell
conform strictly "POSIX correct").
> (unwilling to play such games, EOD for me)
There are no games here - except in your fantasy. We just have
different opinions.
Thorsten
- Next message: William Park: "Re: How to rewrite with awk?"
- Previous message: su: "Re: printf statement"
- In reply to: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Next in thread: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Reply: Sven Mascheck: "Re: PS1 value in shells"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|