[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: <OK> [Groff] serious pdfroff problems
From: |
Andreas Kahari |
Subject: |
Re: <OK> [Groff] serious pdfroff problems |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Jun 2005 21:20:33 +0100 |
On 18/06/05, Jörgen Grahn <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu Jun 16 09:04:08 2005, address@hidden wrote:
> ...
> > I also strongly recommend _against_ using #!/bin/sh as the first line of
> > shell scripts. There is no shell called "sh" anymore. It is always one of
> > the
> > other shells and they are different enough that it has become unreasonable
> > to
> > expect any given shell script to work with all of them. For example, I just
> > discovered that tcsh does not understand $(command) !
>
> Many others have responded, but just to make one thing perfectly clear:
> /bin/sh can never be csh(1) or tcsh(1). Or at least, 99% of all shell
> scripts will break on such a system, making it unusable.
>
> There are many incompatibilities among the shells that *can* be /bin/sh
> (ksh, pdksh, ash, bash, zsh ...) but at least they belong to the same
> family of languages. Csh and tcsh are a completely different track.
There is, of course, a standard for Unix shells. It's part of the
Single Unix Specification, which may be viewed here:
http://www.unix.org/single_unix_specification/
The interesting section is, I suppose, "Shell Command Language" in
the "Shell & Utilities" section.
--
Andreas Kahari
PGP: 1024D/C2E163CB
Re: [Groff] groff as precompiled binaries, Werner LEMBERG, 2005/06/16