Hello, Am 31.10.2012 00:21, schrieb Hans Hagen: > This assumes control over the login shell as well as control over what > the launchers of system processes use. I must admit that till now I > always assumed some stability in this, which is probably okay as long > as one sticks to one specific distribution (of linux).
There is stability in that /bin/sh always must be a (posix compatible) bourne (not again) style shell! > I think that the main problem is that #! /bin/sh can mean anything > (although in your case I suppose you expect it to be the bourne shell). A shell available as /bin/sh can have far more features but you can not rely on them! > So the question is, should the scripts that come with context (like > the installer) be explicit and become #! /bin/bash ? If the scripts do use bashisms they have to be declared with #! /bin/bash. So you do have this options: * rewrite the scripts to be truly posix and use #! /bin/sh (the dash links from another mail may help) * leave the scripts alone with all their bashisms and declare them with #! /bin/bash My advice on this is: in all shellscripts you write, declare the shell that you are testing the script with -- so on most linux systems (and in windows unix environments like msys) use /bin/bash and only change this to /bin/sh if you have to. For example to make it compatible to a minimal system (a jeos VM comes to mind) that is not supposed to provide /bin/bash. Uwe ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
