>In this case, it isn't a script I wrote. > >It's part of a shell script that is used during a driver install for a >Marvell Yukon Gigabit Ehternet Adapter. > >Sadly, Solaris' version of bourne shell? /sbin/sh allows the "bad >syntax" I mentioned above.
It's the Solaris version of "printf" /bin/printf ------ ------ (no newline) ksh93 -c "printf ------" printf: ------: unknown option Usage: printf [ options ] format [string ...] >I wonder if some sort of compatibility mode can be achieved for >bourne's printf syntax. Just a small matter of programming...... printf takes no command line options (as defined in the standard) Unfortunately, the standard does not appear to allow option processing for printf. The "format" must be interpreted as the format specifier for printf(3C) (with listed exceptions). Since "------" is perfectly valid as a format specifier, it MUST be printed correctly. It's unclear what options printf(ksh93) supports as I find none listed in the manual page,. Casper
