On Fri, 2003-11-07 at 15:25, Dan Merillat wrote: > On Fri, 07 Nov 2003, Edward J. Huff wrote: > > > #! /bin/ksh > > Well, that's pretty useless right there. > > /bin/sh is pretty standard. ksh is optional and fairly rare > in my experience.
Does that mean, for instance that you actually don't have it installed on _your_ system? Try before you answer. Also, please try running an executable script starting with #! /bin/ksh. It is certainly standard on Solaris, and on BSD. But poking around in comps.xml, I see that possibly RedHat installs the pdksh package only when you do a full install or ask for it. (I installed "everything"). However, I think the following _is_ true: if /bin/sh is not actually bash masquerading as sh, then /bin/ksh is installed. I'm reading more about portable shell scripts in the GNU autobook. I see that rpm -qf --scripts /bin/ksh shows that installing the ksh rpm adds /bin/ksh to /etc/shells, and erasing it removes the /bin/ksh line. Also, Linux (RedHat) ksh is pdksh, not the released AT&T ksh88 or ksh92 (which is available as an rpm). I also see that on Linux, /bin/sh is a symbolic link to bash. Bash notices when it is invoked as /bin/sh, and behaves differently. But apparently it doesn't do this for ksh. -- Ed Huff
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
