On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 11:26:37AM -0500, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 04:20:57PM +0000, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
One of dash's design goals is to be a purely POSIX compatible shell*,
Not quite.
Fear not, I'm not confusing it with posh(1). That's my reading of the
dash(1) manpage:
The current version of dash is in the process of being changed to
conform with the POSIX 1003.2 and 1003.2a specifications for the
shell.
…
Only features designated by POSIX, plus a few Berkeley extensions, are
being incorporated into this shell.
Greg:
Yeah. It's not meant to be a litmus test for whether your script refrains
from using any extensions. It's not a compliance-testing tool.
It isn't indeed, that would be posh(1).
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
