Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 16:44:46 -0800 From: "Simon J. Gerraty" <sjg@juniper.net> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>, <arch@freebsd.org>, "Baptiste Daroussin" <bapt@freebsd.org>, <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>, <sjg@juniper.net> Subject: Re: Importing mksh in base Message-ID: <74725.1548549886@kaos.jnpr.net> In-Reply-To: <201901270019.x0R0JpF4096103@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> References: <201901270019.x0R0JpF4096103@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Rodney W. Grimes <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > Now on some systems (HPUX springs to mind ;-) /bin/sh is so bad that > > one has to use ksh to run scripts - but they are still sh scripts. > > Doesnt pdksh have a "sh" compatible mode iirc when you > invoke it via a path of sh it behaves as a traditional > bourne shell, also if IIRC Openbsd is doing just that, > /bin/sh -> /bin/pdksh (hard link) It may - I've never tried. I use ksh as an interactive shell, pdksh if no native ksh. I use sh for scripts and back when I was exposed to customers using HP-UX and the like, they (for good reason) didn't want anyone tampering with /bin/sh --sjg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?74725.1548549886>