Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!news.idt.net!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.pbi.net!ns2.qnis.net!not-for-mail From: phil@ns.qnis.net (Phil Jensen) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Serious brain damage in /bin/sh for FreeBSD 2.1.5 Date: 30 Nov 1996 11:20:45 -0000 Organization: QuadraNet Internet Services Lines: 30 Message-ID: <57p5ad$jmv@ns.qnis.net> References: <stanbE1M2D2.38I@netcom.com> <stanbE1Mw49.41q@netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ns.qnis.net In article <stanbE1Mw49.41q@netcom.com>, Stan Brown <stanb@netcom.com> wrote: >stanb@netcom.com (Stan Brown) writes: > No that;s part of my pint./bin/sh as suplied with FreeBSD 2.1.5 is > neitger posix compliant, nor bourne shell compliant. It has some > features of the posix shell that cause it be try to do things that iy > can't do, because it's not fully posix compliant. What are you talking about? Have you even to read the man pages on the Bourne shell? (It is actually ash, a 100% pd clone of the Bourne shell.) Quoting the gospel: "Only features designated by POSIX, plus a few Berkeley extensions, are being incorporated into the shell." Before you go spouting that the FreeBSD shell -isn't- compatible, why don't you try reading the POSIX 1003.2 document itself? > The resultof this is serious problems wth the whole system, since > *many* things are shell scripta te use /bin/sh. Why don't you show us some serious problems? I'd be happy to look at what is "broken." -p -- Phil Jensen QuadraNet Internet Services Network Administrator / Manager http://www.qnis.net UNIX -is- user-friendly! Its just picky about who its friends are. Check out my Bourne Shell Tips Page! http://www.qnis.net/~phil/faq.html