4 ms·
No, I don't "probably" mean POSIX, if I write Bourne and Korn shell, then that is what I mean! I grew up on real UNIX operating systems, not the GNU/Linux cheap
by Annatar 8y ago
No, I don't "probably" mean POSIX, if I write Bourne and Korn shell, then that is what I mean! I grew up on real UNIX operating systems, not the GNU/Linux cheap knockoff! Boy do statements like these make me furious!
- 0xdeadb00f 8y agoWhat do you have against POSIX sh? Unless I'm mistaken, it's compatible with both the GNU/Linux knockoff and Unix (*BSD, etc). I prefer it to Korn and Bourne because it's compatibility is so widespread.
- Annatar 8y agoI have nothing at all against POSIX, but unless one is running HP-UX, Solaris or an illumos-based OS like SmartOS, POSIX compliance is spotty at best in other operating systems. For this reason, the safest thing to do is write code for either the original Bourne shell, or ksh. Programs written in ksh are the most portable across systems, moreso since other systems have it too. And to top it all off, ksh sets the standard for POSIX, especially ksh93.