[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

BASH and Posix Redirection.

From: chris . bitmead
Subject: BASH and Posix Redirection.
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 12:18:28 +1000

>It depends on your definition of `correctness'.  Bash does what POSIX

Well Posix specifies that  ./{foo,bar,baz} is not expanded, but bash does it
because it is nice
and it doesn't hurt anybody. And bash supports other things that support bourne
even though Posix doesn't cover it.

It's nice to be able to list the pipline in logical order...
<input prog1 | prog2 | prog3 >output
Very logical, having input first, output last.

Pretty wierd that if one of the intervening commands is deemed a "compound"
it should be rejected.

Why must bash be a slave to POSIX when posix is dumb, and having the extension
hurts nobody?

(BTW, like most people I'm not going to be patching every copy of bash I have to
use on every machine I use so I can make it work).

Do we acknowledge that the CDPATH thing is a bug?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]