Bruce Sass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since the file was used to provide both the bash builtin and the > standalone test, and -a is undocumented in the test manpage, it is most > likely a bash feature... why not use -e, which is documented and > available in dash, bash, and test?
That's not the -a that we're talking about; that's the unary -a and we're talking about the binary -a. Use of -a as a binary operator is part of the XSI extension of POSIX/SUS and is definitely not specific to bash. I don't know enough about shell history to know who came up with it initially, but it would surprise me if it were bash. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
