sh versus bash

[Sean Kelly <ke...@ad1440.net>]

Any particular reason why build.sh
uses /bin/sh while bootstrap.sh uses
/bin/bash?  Makes building on anything
but Linux mildly annoying ...

--k

Re: sh versus bash

[Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>]

At 09:40  29/1/01 +0100, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>Peter Donald <do...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Some systems apparently link /bin/sh to tcsh
>
>Must have missed that post, but I think this is just wrong. 

could be - I have never seen it but then again I probably wouldn't notice ;)

>> and we were using basyh specific features.
>
>The scripts should work with any Bourne shell (if they don't, we have
>to fix *that*).

wait a bit as I will revert the system to the one before and that should
remove any dependency (not sure what it was - I think Pier was the one to
patch it).


Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*

Re: sh versus bash

[Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>]

Peter Donald <do...@apache.org> wrote:

> Some systems apparently link /bin/sh to tcsh

Must have missed that post, but I think this is just wrong. 

Too many scripts out there assume that /bin/sh is Bourne shell
compatible. Any vendor shipping with a /bin/sh that was not a Bourne
shell would surely get toasted.

On all Unix systems I've ever worked with (including C-Shell based
systems like HP/UX and Solaris) /bin/sh has been a Bourne shell.

> and we were using basyh specific features.

The scripts should work with any Bourne shell (if they don't, we have
to fix *that*).

What features are that? Unfortunately I don't have access to anything
but Linux or FreeBSD ATM, so I cannot spot the problems easily - but
it should be a high priority to fix this and I'll be happy to tackle
it.

Finally switching to /bin/bash surely doesn't help. The scripts
probably work with a Korn shell (which is /bin/sh on AIX). Even if a
system admin cares to install Bash, it will probably end up in
/opt/bin or /usr/local/bin or something.

Stefan

Re: sh versus bash

[Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>]

At 04:30  26/1/01 -0800, Sean Kelly wrote:
>Any particular reason why build.sh
>uses /bin/sh while bootstrap.sh uses
>/bin/bash?  Makes building on anything
>but Linux mildly annoying ...

Some systems apparently link /bin/sh to tcsh ;( (Or so was said a few days
ago on this list) and we were using basyh specific features. However these
features will be removed in a few days (as soon as I get some time) as we
are going to roll back recent changes to the build process.

Cheers,

Pete

*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |
*-----------------------------------------------------*