Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 17:16:06 GMT From: Mark Valentine <mark@thuvia.demon.co.uk> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> Cc: standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why I am opposed to a Standards Ghetto Message-ID: <200210271716.g9RHG6dl038740@dotar.thuvia.org> In-Reply-To: <200210271656.g9RGudeO031350@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> > Date: Sun 27 Oct, 2002 > Subject: Re: Why I am opposed to a Standards Ghetto > So why is a small incompatibility in expr(1) so important to you when > the small incompatibilities in sh(1) not? I dealt with incompatibilities between sh(1) implementations years ago; this is the first time I've come across an expr(1) that breaks my scripts. > (As we have already noted, > Solaris has both a twenty-year-old backwards shell and a working POSIX > shell.) My scripts work just fine with both. What's non-working about /bin/sh? Cheers, Mark. -- Mark Valentine, Thuvia Labs <mark@thuvia.co.uk> <http://www.thuvia.co.uk>; "Tigers will do ANYTHING for a tuna fish sandwich." Mark Valentine uses "We're kind of stupid that way." *munch* *munch* and endorses FreeBSD -- <http://www.calvinandhobbes.com>; <http://www.freebsd.org>; To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210271716.g9RHG6dl038740>