[CDBUG-talk] Sysadmin blog

[Brian Callahan]

On 11/17/14 22:18, Jaime wrote:
> On Monday, November 17, 2014, James L. Lauser <james at jlauser.net 
> <mailto:james at jlauser.net>> wrote:
>
>     That assumes you don't do a common Linuxism and assume that sh is
>     actually bash or something else and write a script that depends on
>     a feature that's not common to all sh-like shells.
>
>
> What constitutes a "sh-like shell"?
>
> Jaime
>

A Bourne shell (i.e. not a C shell).
POSIX specifies what a shell should do:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/utilities/sh.html
and
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html

Of course, such things are only part of the battle: the other part is 
not using non-standard userland utilities or non-standard flags in your 
scripts (e.g., did you know that `sed -i` is not part of POSIX? OpenBSD 
doesn't implement the -i flag!).

~Brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nycbug.org/pipermail/cdbug-talk/attachments/20141117/4c5cb63b/attachment.html>