2008-12-01, 08:51(+00), Casper H.S Dik:
Stephane CHAZELAS [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's true it was vague and misleading,
/bin is not the standard place to look for sh as far as the
POSIX standard is concerned. That doesn't mean that standard
commands (POSIX or not) cannot be found in /bin
2008-12-1, 10:16(+00), Andre Majorel:
[...]
Tru64:
/bin/sh can behave either as a Bourne shell or a POSIX shell
(ksh88) depending on the environment
How does it decide ? argv[0] ? isatty (STDIN_FILENO) ?
That was answered in another article with a quote of the sh man
page on Tru64: via
2008-11-30, 06:11(+00), Tam Ha:
Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
There's a common confusion in this in the nature of /bin/sh.
There's no standard (neither POSIX nor Unix) that specifies that
/bin/sh should be any variant of the Bourne shell.
Sure there is, POSIX. Or rather their Austin Group
2008-11-30, 06:11(+00), Tam Ha:
Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
There's a common confusion in this in the nature of /bin/sh.
There's no standard (neither POSIX nor Unix) that specifies that
/bin/sh should be any variant of the Bourne shell.
Sure there is, POSIX.
[...]
And on this. First, POSIX has
2008-12-1, 01:10(+01), Sven Mascheck:
In comp.unix.shell Stephane CHAZELAS wrote:
The Bourne shell, as can still be found on some systems either in some
non-standard place (/bin on Solaris, /usr/old/bin on HPUX) or named
differently [...]
What do you mean with non-standard place here?
It's
2008-11-29, 16:23(+00), Tam Ha:
Jorgen Grahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(I could get away with using Bash in these cases. It has functions,
local variables and so on. Writing portable Bourne shell is not as
much fun.)
Can you explain this? Bourne is always more portable than Bash.
That's why
On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 09:30:06 -0500, Nick Craig-Wood wrote:
robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
when I run a command
myapp 21
Try
myapp 21 | cat
and see what you get. You should get the same output as the python.
#!python
print os.popen(myapp 21).read()
the stderr stuff comes
