Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!news.mtu.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!worldnet.att.net!howland.erols.net!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!pooh!chet From: chet@pooh.INS.CWRU.Edu (Chet Ramey) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: sh bug? Date: 17 Mar 1997 20:59:48 GMT Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA Lines: 16 Message-ID: <5gkbc4$ks9@alexander.INS.CWRU.Edu> References: <332369be.3271553@news.fu-berlin.de> <5g7ltp$ps@uriah.heep.sax.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: pooh.ins.cwru.edu Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:37249 In article <5g7ltp$ps@uriah.heep.sax.de>, J Wunsch <joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de> wrote: >Btw., bash is by far nothing you could count as a reference shell. If >at all, use a genuine ksh, then at least you've got what the Posix >consortium deemed the only shell. Bash-2.0 (the current release) is mostly POSIX.2-compliant, and fully compliant when run in `posix mode'. ksh-88 is not POSIX-compliant. ksh-93 is compliant, to about the same degree as Bash-2.0 in posix mode. If you have bugs in Bash's POSIX compliance to report, please do so. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer Chet Ramey, Case Western Reserve University Internet: chet@po.CWRU.Edu