On 28/06/2019 16:05, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Harald van Dijk <a...@gigawatt.nl> wrote:
That aside, I asked you last time you made this claim about POSIX to
back it up. There is no requirement for standard utilities to be
implemented portably. You responded then:
POSIX intends to create portability at source code level.
Code that is not portable does not follow the POSIX way.
That's not a requirement for POSIX implementations, so it's not relevant.
Well, I like to be able to test various shells on the same platform.
This is close to impossible if I need to install a specific OS for every shell.
Agreed that portability is a nice feature to have. It has a cost, and it
is up to the maintainers to determine whether the feature is worth the
cost, and if it is, whether it is worth the cost right now. If they
choose not to focus efforts on portability right now, it is
understandable that you do not personally test that shell. It's just
that the conclusion from that should not be "this shell should not be
considered", it should be "for this shell to be considered, someone else
will have to provide the details".
Cheers,
Harald van Dijk
