[colug-432] ksh (Re: Why Bourne Shell Compatible: Portability)

[Richard Troth]

Point me at a 'curl' or 'wget' retrievable tar ball and I'll build it
for ya.   :-)

I think the problem is that the distributors are put off by the CPL
(AT&T's GPL wannabe).

Meanwhile, this reminds me of a story ... feared it might be urban
legend, but it checks out.  Microsoft appears to have taken some of
their Unix-workalike parts via MKS (which itself is an excellent piece
of work).  So once upon a time this certain M$ project manager was
rattling on about how they were going to include a version of the Korn
Shell in an upcoming release (probably SFU, which I have never gotten
to work anyway).  Someone in the audience questioned why M$ was so
back-leveled, why they did not have a more current implementation of
KSH.  The M$ PM said it was "pretty compatible" and things should be
fine.  This went back and forth until someone else in the audience
pointed out to the M$ PM that the questioner was in fact David Korn
himself.

        http://www.unix.com/whats-your-mind/33991-windows-korn-shell.html

        http://www.softpanorama.org/Scripting/Shellorama/humor.shtml

        http://slashdot.org/story/01/02/06/2030205/David-Korn-Tells-All

-- R;   <><





On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 19:05, Jeff Frontz <jeff.frontz at gmail.com> wrote:
> bash is horrifyingly incompatible with ksh.  It's why I loath bash --
> I continually try to use my "muscle memory" ksh-isms without looking
> what I'm doing and end up with lots and lots of bash gibberish.  It's
> horrifying, horrifying I say!
>
> pdksh is only slightly better; it's only good when you can't run an
> actual ksh for some reason-- and there's really not a very good reason
> as you can download it (and the source) for free.
>
> Visit http://www.kornshell.com/  for all your Korn shell needs.
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Rob Funk <rfunk at funknet.net> wrote:
>>
>> The actual Bourne shell doesn't even exist on any non-commercial Unix/Linux,
>> since it's AT&T code. The closest we get is ash or dash, which were intended
>> to be basic Bourne-compatible shells with no extra bells and whistles.
>>
>> bash is the "Bourne-Again Shell", originally designed by the GNU people to be
>> compatible with the original Bourne shell, but extend it. I think bash may
>> also try to be compatible with the Korn Shell (also AT&T code, though there's
>> a "pdksh" clone, and also intended to be Bourne-compatible).
>>
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing list
> colug-432 at colug.net
> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432
>