31 Dec
2022
31 Dec
'22
2:47 a.m.
On 12/30/22 3:02 PM, Larry McVoy wrote:
On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 02:51:26PM -0500, Chet Ramey
wrote:
Historical interest? Software archaeology? Reference behavior?
I don't think anyone is suggesting that we use it as a login shell, in the
same way that no one is suggesting we go back to using v7 as an everyday
computing environment. The world's come too far.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU chet(a)case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
On 12/30/22 1:25 PM, Paul Ruizendaal wrote:
Is there are reason to hang on to the Bourne shell? Maybe shell scripts?
Does it perform better than ksh or bash?
London and Reiser report about porting the shell that ???it required by far the largest
conversion effort of any supposedly portable program, for the simple reason that it is not
portable.??? By the time of SysIII this is greatly improved, but also in porting the
SysIII user land it was the most complex of the set so far.
Have you read
http://www.collyer.net/who/geoff/sh.tour.pdf
and looked at http://www.collyer.net/who/geoff/v7sh.tar ?
In the limited literature on Bourne Shell porting, this is authoritative.