Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: zsh-workers: zsh-3.1.4
- X-seq: zsh-workers 4026
 
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 
- To: Timothy J Luoma <luomat+Lists/Zsh/workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,        zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 
- Subject: Re: zsh-workers: zsh-3.1.4
 
- Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:09:26 -0700
 
- In-reply-to: <199806011633.MAA26654@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 
- References: <199806010819.JAA27897@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 	<980601085634.ZM26365@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 	<199806011633.MAA26654@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 
On Jun 1, 12:33pm, Timothy J Luoma wrote:
} Subject: Re: zsh-workers: zsh-3.1.4
}
} > "make clean" fails when /bin/sh is bash because $(SUBDIRS) is empty in
} > Doc and Etc and maybe elsewhere.  Bash gets a syntax error at
} 
} Yet another reason, is it not, why /bin/sh should be /bin/sh and not  
} /bin/something-that-wants-to-pretend-it-is-sh ????
Unfortunately, there's no (?) PD implementation of the pure old-fashioned
Bourne shell that can be distributed with Linux.  It's either pretend, or
don't have a /bin/sh at all, I think.
That said, I'm not entirely sure that the Bourne shell wouldn't also have
choked on that construct.  My guess is it was tested with zsh and ksh,
not with a "real" sh.
-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author