Would it make more sense to include something like busybox (www.busybox.net) into sage? Busybox includes a shell (ash, I think), and most shellutils and textutils one would probably want to use (this includes awk, sed, etc). Instead of trying to fix the sage shell scripts to work in any combination of shell/utils/etc, just target the busybox shell with its corresponding utils.
I don't know how feasible it is to compile busybox on OSX, solaris, or other unices, though. Gonzalo """ BusyBox combines tiny versions of many common UNIX utilities into a single small executable. It provides replacements for most of the utilities you usually find in GNU fileutils, shellutils, etc. The utilities in BusyBox generally have fewer options than their full-featured GNU cousins; however, the options that are included provide the expected functionality and behave very much like their GNU counterparts. BusyBox provides a fairly complete environment for any small or embedded system. """ On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Dr. David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > > I thought all you mathematicians could not resist looking at this. > > I know it sounds crazy, but it actually forms the basis of a portable > method of getting the number of seconds since 1/1/1970 on Unix. > > Learn more from my ticket at > > http://sagetrac.org/sage_trac/ticket/7188 > > > which needs review! > > dave > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
