scripting

Bennett Todd bet at rahul.net
Tue Jul 13 14:40:33 PDT 2004


2004-07-13T21:16:05 Björn Lindberg:
> Bennett Todd <bet at rahul.net> writes:
> > Since ksh has attempted to swing around to being more Posixy, I
> > expect you're right.
> 
> I had the impression that it is the POSIX shell standard that is more
> or less based on ksh (or rather, based on Bourne shell but
> incorporating ksh extensions at the time). Bash in turn derives most
> of its beyond Bourne-extensions fron ksh. I believe that ksh88 is
> quite close to POSIX in that it is both compliant, and does not have
> too many extensions of its own.

Whereas I had the impression that as the POSIX standard was
being settled, bash was being adapted to be its first reference
implementation; where details differed from ksh, for some time bash
complied and ksh didn't.

Thanks for the POSIX shell ptrs and tips.

-Bennett
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-chat/attachments/20040713/8df26d81/attachment.sig>


More information about the lfs-chat mailing list