[NTLUG:Discuss] what is ":bad option"?

[Christopher Browne]

On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:44:58 EST, the world broke into rejoicing as
Steve Baker <sjbaker1 at airmail.net>  said:
> m m wrote:
> > 
> > Someone told me here (sorry I deleted the mail)
> > If I am using bash, the it should be:
> > #! /bin/bash
> > yes, I use RH 6.2 default, which is bash (I guess, maybe wrong), but I chec
k
> > some script files, they are begin with
> > #!/bin/sh
> > I don't know what to say.
> 
> You should really use '/bin/sh' because Bash is just a re-implementation
> of 'sh' (the original 'Bourne Shell') - albeit with a lot of fancy add-ons.
> '/bin/sh' works because that file is just a link to /bin/bash (or whatever
> other Bourne Shell clone you might happen to be using).
> 
> So, if you use /bin/bash, it'll work - but not on a machine that has
> a different Bourne shell clone installed on it (for example - my SGI
> machine at work that only has the *true* Bourne Shell and a bunch of
> C-Shell clones).

Doesn't it include Korn Shell?  I thought that /bin/ksh had gotten pretty
ubiquitous by now, and it's a fair bit more functional than Original
Bourne Shell.

Anything where I'm trying to keep it portable, I use ksh, as it's
available on all the systems I've used lately, and tracks the POSIX
shell standard.

<aside> I noticed this week that Perl was installed on a "bog
standard" Solaris box; looks like it's nearly getting ubiquitous
too... </aside>
--
cbbrowne at hex.net - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/scripting.html>
>Ever heard of .cshrc?
That's a city in Bosnia.  Right?
(Discussion in comp.os.linux.misc on the intuitiveness of commands.)