There was one Bourne Shell, but various versions and enhancements
made them somewhat different on different platforms. Remember that
BSD split off on Unix Version 6. There was very little effort to
standardize until about 1990. Some systems would have both the
Berkeley version of /bin/sh as well as the System V version. I don't recall
the differences, but there were some gotchas. I can look at some of my
older scripts.
Actually, csh brought out some very good enhancements, such as job
control, built in commands, variable substitution, most of which were
incorporated into the Korn Shell. The idea behind the cshell is that its
syntax is more c-ish, which would be more preferable to C programmers.
Since some of my work was cross platform stuff, it was always important
to keep a common base, and I always could count on /bin/sh installed
and also available during single user mode where shells in /usr/bin woudl
not be. So, most of my simple scripts are generic sh. Most of my more
complicated scripts are ksh. Perl is better for more complicated stuff
except that one cannot count on Perl being installed on all systems,
though I cannot fathom a system without it.
On 19 Jun 2000, at 15:29, Paul Lussier wrote:
>
> To my knowledge, there's only 1 Bourne shell, and since it came from AT&T, I
> would expect that to be SYSV (same with ksh, since Steven Korn was also of
> AT&T). I've never heard of a BSD variant of the Bourne shell, nor a BSD
> variant of the Korn shell.
Jerry Feldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Associate Director
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
