Dnia 08-11-2006, śro o godzinie 20:26 +0100, Jakub Bogusz napisał(a): > On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 08:21:01PM +0100, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: > > Dnia 08-11-2006, śro o godzinie 11:54 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz > > napisał(a): > > > On Wednesday 08 November 2006 11:49, Jakub Bogusz wrote: > > > > But it tests only IFS compliance. > > > > What about all other functionality? > > > Haven't seen tests for other functionality. > > > > Should we aim at perfect POSIX compatibility or perfect usability? Bash > > does not seem to be a heavy dependency and is actively maintained (so > > the compatibility issues will go away over time as opposed to pdksh). > > And POSIX-compatibility of scripts will go away as nobody will care > about.
To me it sounds similar to the sparc/alpha problem. If someone uses a POSIX-only shell (which does not exist), she will complain and things will get fixed. If noone complains then it is a sign that noone cares and POSIX compatibility is done just for the sake of doing it. -- Patryk Zawadzki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PLD Linux
signature.asc
Description: To jest część listu podpisana cyfrowo
_______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
