> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randall R Schulz
> TAM,
>
> Cygwin includes ash, BASH and pdksh (as well as zsh and tcsh), so the
> answer is pretty much "yes," though with BASH you might want to
> investigate its Bourne shell compatibility mode. I'm unfamiliar with
> any details of pdksh's Bourne compatibility, but it should be pretty
> close or perhaps have a Bourne shell compatibility mode as BASH does.
===
Isn't 'ash' (/bin/sh) bourne shell compatible? I thought the
intent in ashwas to strip the shell down to basics, but still run original
bourne shell scripts. I'm not sure, but I think ash might provide
the closest bourne shell compatibility, since I don't think it provides
all the ksh enhancements.
Assuming one only wanted the basic bourne shell, wouldn't ash
(/bin/sh)
be the best choice (smallest .exe, least overhead, and fastest load
time). I believe it is the shell used by default for /bin/sh.
If you need korn shell extensions, /bin/sh might not have what you
need.
-linda
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
