On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 01:19 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 02-11-2007 17:35:08 +0000, Roy Marples wrote: > > I don't see them as inferior. > > I see them as more portable and less confusing. > > Please stop calling it "more portable".
But is it more portable as then then works across more than one shell. > The shell code you see in > configure can in a way be called "portable". Your POSIX compliant stuff > isn't. Sure it is - it should work on a shell that claims POSIX compliance. > In fact, by stating #!/bin/sh you actually make the code useless > on a number of platforms, where it would have been working fine if there > just were #!/bin/bash there. Then the issue is to fix their sh so it follows POSIX compliance. As soon as a dash, bb or FreeBSD sh issue is found where it deviates from POSIX but it works on bash a lot of people say "dash bug, therefore invalid > It seems to me that you actually mean "more FreeBSD-able" or something, > which is a high price to pay for a relatively small part of Gentoo as a > whole. More embeddable. More BSDable. More Linuxable - bash isn't the only linux shell, there are plently of others. Thanks Roy -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
