As I also feared, "bsh" is also conflated with Bourne shell on other operating systems:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/systems/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.aix.cmds/doc/aixcmds1/bsh.htm (The above is from AIX.) So, I guess the question here for ARC is whether "familiarity" with Linux or familiarity with AIX is more important. I suspect I know the answer, although were it up to me, I'd just skip the confusion by denying *any* use of bsh going forward... - Garrett Joerg Schilling wrote: > Norm Jacobs <Norm.Jacobs at sun.com> wrote: > > >>> Please use "beansh" >>> >> Forgive me for pointing out the obvious here, but /usr/bin/bsh on Fedora >> and Ubuntu appear to be BeanShell (I didn't check anywhere else). Given >> that this is a familiarity case, wouldn't it make sense to install it in >> the familiar location and have 'bsh' do the familiar thing? >> > > Many Solaris users have the real bsh (not the bean shell) under > /opt/csw/bin/bsh. > > It may be different on Fedora or Ubuntu but on Solaris, there is a different > history. > > J?rg > >
