[CentOS] Bourne shell deprecated?

[Gordon Messmer]

On 04/27/2016 05:20 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> While older versions of the Bourne Shell are not POSIX compliant, recent
> versions only miss the feature "arithmetic expansion" and are otherwise
> probably closer to POSIX than bash or dash. Note that "dash" does not support
> multi-byte characters and thus cannot be certified for a full UNIX system but
> only for embedded UNIX systems.

That's good to know.  But, since there seem to be several forks of 
Bourne shell, currently, is there a reference for the differences 
between them?

> As far as I can see, this was related to "mailx" and not to the shell.

I looked for substantiation of the original claim that the bourne shell 
had security problems.  Apparently I should have looked closer.  Thanks 
for catching that.