Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!foxhound.dsto.gov.au!fang.dsto.gov.au!myall.awadi.com.au!myall!blymn From: blymn@awadi.com.au (Brett Lymn) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.apps Subject: Re: cnews Date: 7 Apr 93 17:27:14 Organization: AWA Defence Industries Lines: 24 Message-ID: <BLYMN.93Apr7172714@mallee.awadi.com.au> References: <1p0652Ejc9@uni-erlangen.de> <1993Mar28.001710.5222@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> <BLYMN.93Mar30161725@mallee.awadi.com.au> <C4yxnB.EFH@veda.is> NNTP-Posting-Host: mallee.awadi.com.au In-reply-to: adam@veda.is's message of 4 Apr 93 16:54:46 GMT >>>>> On 4 Apr 93 16:54:46 GMT, adam@veda.is (Adam David) said: Adam> blymn@awadi.com.au (Brett Lymn) writes: >and when I tried to make install epoch it did not work, the make kept >dying on a weird shell error, as soon as I put sh back to the original >things worked fine. My philosophy is to put bash as sh only when I >need it. Adam> Whatever scripts rely on /bin/sh to work can put '#!/foo/bash' on the top Adam> line. And if bash breaks something another shell can be tried instead. Unfortunately things like the Configure script actually invoke sh inside the script so just changing the top line does not work (I did try that one :-) Adam> Has anyone tried compiling a minimalist bash that is small enough to be Adam> a real /bin/sh replacement? The size is not the issue (at least for me ;-) it is the bugs in bash that bit me and forced me to change back. If bash would behave the same as sh in all circumstances I would use it, bash does not do this. -- Brett Lymn