Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-27 Thread Pierre Gaston
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:52 AM, John Kearney dethrop...@web.de wrote: Am 27.01.2013 01:37, schrieb Clark WANG: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org wrote: I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start in posix compliance mode when started as 'sh' (/bin/sh).

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-27 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Sunday 27 January 2013 03:22:35 Pierre Gaston wrote: On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:52 AM, John Kearney dethrop...@web.de wrote: Am 27.01.2013 01:37, schrieb Clark WANG: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org wrote: I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-27 Thread Linda Walsh
Clark WANG wrote: I think every POSIX compatible shell has its own extensions so there's no guarantee that a script which works fine in shell A would still work in shell B even if both A and B are POSIX compatible unless the script writer only uses POSIX compatible features. Is there a

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-27 Thread Chet Ramey
On 1/26/13 3:27 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start in posix compliance mode when started as 'sh' (/bin/sh). While that's true, I think you're not reading far enough about posix mode. The man page and description of `set -o posix' say: Change the

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-27 Thread Chet Ramey
On 1/27/13 3:55 PM, Linda Walsh wrote: --- Excellent point -- then what is the point of POSIX compatibility? To provide a useful subset of all the shell language features that can be used to write scripts portable between shells that offer that feature set. Considering that there seems

Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-26 Thread Linda Walsh
I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start in posix compliance mode when started as 'sh' (/bin/sh). What does that mean about bash extensions like arrays and use of [[]]? Those are currently not-POSIX (but due to both Bash and Ksh having them, some think that such features are

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-26 Thread Clark WANG
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org wrote: I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start in posix compliance mode when started as 'sh' (/bin/sh). What does that mean about bash extensions like arrays and use of [[]]? Those are currently not-POSIX (but due

Re: Q on Bash's self-documented POSIX compliance...

2013-01-26 Thread John Kearney
Am 27.01.2013 01:37, schrieb Clark WANG: On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Linda Walsh b...@tlinx.org wrote: I noted on the bash man page that it says it will start in posix compliance mode when started as 'sh' (/bin/sh). What does that mean about bash extensions like arrays and use of [[]]?