On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 09:26:51AM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:18:57AM -0400, Aaron Schrab wrote:
> > At 15:41 +0200 16 Apr 2018, Gero Treuner <gero-m...@innocircle.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 07:53:56AM -0500, Paul Keusemann wrote:
> > > > { [ -e ".git" ] && command -v git >/dev/null 2>&1; } \
> > > > || exec cat VERSION
> > > >
> > > > does not work when run in a bourne shell. The -e option is not
> > > > supported in
[...]
> Whoops, thank you Paul for pointing this out.One wonders what systems these are, and whether this is even worth considering. If it is, I believe Bourne shell allows compound tests like the following: [ -f $file -o -d $file ] which I believe would cover it, though I don't have access to a machine that currently has an original Bourne shell to test. It is becoming rather difficult to find on-line references to syntax for the (now obsolete) original Bourne shell. Most such refereces I can find actually refer to bash, ksh, or other POSIX shell variants. Wasn't there some recent-ish notion that Mutt would now require vaguely modern (i.e. C99-compliant) systems to compile? If so, doesn't that implicitly include having a /bin/sh that is POSIX? -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
pgpgIBpWSusot.pgp
Description: PGP signature
