Joerg Schilling <joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote, on 18 Apr 2019: > > I just discovered a real difference: > > The v7shell and up to the Solaris 10 Bourne sh do not make a difference in > interactive and non-interactive shells and always set up the standard > handlers. > > ksh88, ksh93 and bash do not set up own default handlers for non-interactive > shells. > > Since ksh88 is the first Bourne Shell derivate that is based on malloc() > instead of sbrk(), ksh88 was able to change this. A Bourne Shell that is > based > on sbrk() needs to set up signal handlers before it can do string processing > and before it knows whether it is an interactive shell or a non-interactive > shell. > > What I like to hear from Geoff is whether this difference is required by > POSIX, > since that is not a difference in practice (because the Bourne Shell installs > "done()" that exits for some other signals.
It's optional in POSIX. P2420 L77505, "An interactive shell may reset or catch signals ignored on entry." > Given that there was a lot of long mails and a lot of confusion, I would like > to see the basic claims as a full sentence again, to be able to understand > the > different positions. I think I did that in my reply to Thor Lancelot Simon on Tuesday. -- Geoff Clare <g.cl...@opengroup.org> The Open Group, Apex Plaza, Forbury Road, Reading, RG1 1AX, England
