Login | Register
My pages Projects Community openCollabNet

Discussions > dev > Re: [joist-dev] Re: [joist-cvs] CVS update: joist/build build.sh

Project highlights: Architectural Overview

Discussion topic

Back to topic list

Re: [joist-dev] Re: [joist-cvs] CVS update: joist/build build.sh

Author edk
Full name Ed Korthof
Date 2001-04-05 23:55:44 PDT
Message On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 10:21:54PM -0700, Daniel Rall wrote:
> edk at collab dot net writes:
> > IMO, /bin/bash is better 'cause it's the shell for which the scripts are
> > were written. On some operating systems, /bin/sh will not be the same
> > as bash. Of course, designing for bash instead of sh may be somewhat
> > problematic -- it seems that bash is not cross platform compatible,
> > though sh is... <sigh>
> Bash is completely cross platform compatible. Bash 1.x is not
> necessarily compatible with bash 2.x, however.

Consider this:

bash-2.03$ uname -s
bash-2.03$ echo $SHELL
bash-2.03$ for i in ;
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `;'

[edk@sc-dev2 publish]$ uname -s
[edk@sc-dev2 publish]$ echo $SHELL
[edk@sc-dev2 publish]$ for i in ;
> do
> echo 1
> done
[edk@sc-dev2 publish]$


> Writing scripts for vanilla sh should solve most of our problems,
> assuming we indeed have a lowest common denominator test environment.

This sounds good to me. It does mean avoiding a few short cuts which
bash provides, but nothing major (at least, nothing major which I've
seen so far). Still, until we've done that, it seems fair to specify
/bin/bash (IMO) ...

cheers --


« Previous message in topic | 1 of 1 | Next message in topic »


Show all messages in topic

Re: [joist-dev] Re: [joist-cvs] CVS update: joist/build build.sh edk Ed Korthof 2001-04-05 23:55:44 PDT
Messages per page: