On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 02:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 02:19, Laurent Bercot wrote: > > http://www.busybox.net/FAQ.html#standards says: > > "portability to dozens of platforms is only interesting in terms of > > offering a restricted feature set that works everywhere, not growing dozens > > of platform-specific extensions." > > > > Bashisms are arguably Linux-specific extensions to Single Unix, don't > > you think ? ;) > > no, not even close. i dont know why people think "bash == Linux", but > it doesnt. it is actively used on many many more systems than just > Linux, and i guess i need to point out the fact that bash is far older > than Linux.
Yes, it's available on all sorts of systems, not just Linux. No, /bin/sh is not bash in all sorts of systems. Bash has been around much longer than Linux but before Linux, it was not installed as /bin/sh on any system, and even today it's not installed as /bin/sh on anything but Linux (and maybe OS X, I'm not familiar enough with it to know). We're talking about features that are available in scripts that begin #!/bin/sh, not features available in scripts that begin #!/bin/bash (or #!/bin/ash or #!/bin/hush). At least that's my understanding of the discussion. Cheers! _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
