>
> John Summerfield wrote:
> > I don't know which bash extensions caught me though. Perhaps those who
> > care should identify errors and take it up with the bash developers.
>
> I would argue that ideally if bash is run as "/bin/sh" that nothing
> beyond the POSIX "/bin/sh" specification should function, that is no
> bash extensions should work. This could be accomplished by making bash
> limit itself based on the running name (making this a Bash Group
> problem) or simply using a non-bash limited POSIX only "/bin/sh" (making
> this a RedHat problem). I would think the later would be far more simple
> than the former.
>
I agree that it should be a good thing the use of #!/bin/sh in
scripts would be nice for portabilty but remember there are probably many
Linux scripts in the distrib who assume /bin/sh is in fact bash
But it certainly would be foolishness to downgrade the login shell to
Unix standards or put it in VI mode by default.
--
Jean Francois Martinez
Project Independence: Linux for the Masses
http://www.independence.seul.org
_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
