On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 21:04:59 +0000 Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 20:58:52 +0000 | Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > | Right, and bash arrays are not shell | > | http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/toc.htm | > | > Sure they're shell. They're just not POSIX. | | Maybe I should have been more clear. | | Anything in /etc/conf.d/ should be able to be read by a POSIX | compliant shell. This means no arrays.
Why? What's wrong with requiring a shell that supports various features beyond what POSIX specifies? Granted, choice of shell is good, but not if it's at the expense of functionality or ease of use. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
