[CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
Stephen Harris
lists at spuddy.orgFri Apr 24 13:01:40 UTC 2015
- Previous message: [CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
- Next message: [CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular > Unix, using ksh by default? Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell. Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88 was a part of the SVr4 specification) and so many scripts were written with #!/bin/ksh at the start (including tools like "patchadd"). Note Solaris had bugs in those tools because they didn't start "#!/bin/ksh -p" so if you had a $ENVFILE that included lines like "set -o noclobber" or had aliases then scripts would break (patchadd was a perfect example). Many of these got fixed by Solaris 8 :-) -- rgds Stephen
- Previous message: [CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
- Next message: [CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list