Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 16:54:57 -0600 From: Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> To: Doug Barton <Doug@gorean.org> Cc: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposed new Bourne shell init files Message-ID: <20000331165457.A2556@holly.calldei.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003311338030.72992-100000@dt051n0b.san.rr.com> References: <20000331224327.Y581@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003311338030.72992-100000@dt051n0b.san.rr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, March 31, 2000, Doug Barton wrote: > In my mind there is a difference between items that are > freebsd-exclusive (like set -o and alias) and items that we have unique > implementations of, like export. The latter are available on other > platforms, and therefore, IMO we should follow the more generally accepted > format. Extending that argument to either not take advantage of features > unique to FreeBSD (silly and wasteful) or to doing everything FreeBSD'ish > just because we can (teaches a bad lesson) goes too far in either > direction for my taste. ``set -o'', ``alias'', and ``export'' are all portable. A few options for ``set -o'' may not be, but otherwise they are. Where did you get the idea that the first two were FreeBSD-exclusive? -- |Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> |To be, or not to be, those are the parameters. `---------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000331165457.A2556>