Re: [Nmh-workers] unit and acceptance tests

[Chad Walstrom]

Tethys <address@hidden>  wrote:
> Bourne shell. It may not be the most expressive language out there,
> or even necessarily the best language for the job. But it's a)
> guaranteed to be everywhere that nmh is run[1], and b) it's probably
> the most widely used to wrap existing mh commands, and so is a
> natural fit for testing.

Agreed.  To note, autotest is designed for generating Bourne shell
scripts, just as autoconfig is.

> [1] Actually, is this true? Does OS X have a bourne shell? I know
> it's got a csh. Even if it doesn't, I'd still say /bin/sh is the
> right language to use for tests.

OS X 10.3 switched the default shell from tcsh to BASH.  BASH can be
told to operate in POSIX 1003.2 mode with "--posix", so yes, Mac OS X
has Borne shell.

-- 
Chad Walstrom <address@hidden>           http://www.wookimus.net/
           assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */