> /bin/test and the test builtin to /bin/sh are the same source code, I already supposed that.
> Edgar's question was more on what the definition of -nt should be, when > the 2nd arg file does not exist. Right. > But since no portable script can really use -nt (as it isn't standardised) > I'm not sure that this is all that important. It's a pity it's not stadardised, but if different shells behave differently, there's little chance it ever will be, no? I think test -nt/-ot is about the only non-SUS-thing (apart from some find operand I forget which one it is) my shell scripts knowingly rely on (I do sometimes rely on bmake and some non-standard M4 extensions). I'm avoiding local, which is a pain to do, but using find -newer to imitate test -nt looks like to great an overkill. Note that stat(1) isn't SUS either, so the only workaround I could think of is parsing two ls -l outputs.
