On Fri, 08 Aug 2008, Szakáts Viktor wrote: Hi Viktor,
> And I think the answer to your question is: yes. As far > as I could see on internet articles, Apple tackled sh > to not understand 'echo -n', in order to be compliant with > the Unix whatever standard. This didn't affect bash though, > which still understands ''echo -n'. But they didn't created new shell. This shell (/bin/sh) is hacked bash copy only which will be recognized as bash by scripts which later will bahve wrongly. IMHO It's the worst thing they could do. > The two shell binaries > are almost identical, except some subtle differences, like > this one. Unfortunately they are _too_similar_ and both reports that are bash when one of them is hacked bash confusing scripts. > I'm referring to this article as a starting point: > http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20071106192548833 > [ read the comments too. ] I've just read it and I do not agree it's well implemented feature. Due to MacOSX authors we will have new rules in autoconf to detect bash and MacOSX hacked bash :-( best regards, Przemek _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
