On Mar 3, 2005, at 3:25 PM, Gregory K.Ruiz-Ade wrote:
On Mar 3, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Todd Walton wrote:
I thought bash was supposed to be 100% compatible with sh, in that a pure sh script would run identically in both sh and bash? If that's the case, I don't see a problem with linking /bin/sh to /bin/bash.
The problem is that the compatibility doesn't go the other way. If you write a script taking advantage of bash-specific features, it won't run in Bourne Shell (POSIX sh). Systems which merely symlink /bin/sh to /bin/bash result in shell scripts which use bash-specific things that don't work in /bin/sh on systems with a _real_ /bin/sh.
The big one is that everybody in bash land writes:
export FOO="something"
but sh requires:
FOO="something"; export FOO
-a
-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
