These all first appeared in ksh: functions, local, return, $((math))
> > But to my mind, the question is moot, since post-1.0.2 we'll almost
> > definitely have c_rehash builtin to the openssl command.
>
> that would also work
:)
It will also be much much much faster, since it doesn't have to c
These all first appeared in ksh: functions, local, return, $((math))
> > But to my mind, the question is moot, since post-1.0.2 we'll almost
> > definitely have c_rehash builtin to the openssl command.
>
> that would also work
:)
It will also be much much much faster, since it doesn't have to c
On Wed 27 Aug 2014 15:24:45 Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
> > i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying
> > on a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
>
> Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
> Bourne
On Wed 27 Aug 2014 15:24:45 Salz, Rich via RT wrote:
> > i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying
> > on a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
>
> Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
> Bourne
> i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying on
> a
> shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell. In my comment, I deliberately used the term "posix
> i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying on
> a
> shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
Last I looked, autoconf doesn't use anything that really wasn't in Version 7
Bourne shell. In my comment, I deliberately used the term "posix
On Tue 26 Aug 2014 04:31:07 Rich Salz via RT wrote:
> The sad thing is, perl is widely available than posix shell. cool hack tho.
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying on
a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
-mike
___
On Tue 26 Aug 2014 04:31:07 Rich Salz via RT wrote:
> The sad thing is, perl is widely available than posix shell. cool hack tho.
i don't think that's really true. else, why is autoconf & friends relying on
a shell and not perl ? those see way more distribution than openssl.
-mike
_
