[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Fwd: kdeeject
From:       Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date:       2003-12-16 16:46:11
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 16 December 2003 16:37, Casey Allen Shobe wrote:
> David Faure (Mon, December 15 2003 16:02)
>
> > Interesting. I think there are a few bash-isms in the script though, like
> > using a function and TIMER=$[TIMER+1]. I wonder what kind of problems
> > this might bring to non-bash users (we could of course put /bin/bash at
> > the top of the file - are there systems without bash installed at all?).
>
> Yes.  Some of my linux systems do not, and will not, have BASH.
>
> > But "which" is also non-portable AFAIK, and I'm not sure what the
> > portable equivalent is ("type -p"?)
>
> which is not standard - there are several different 'which' programs which
> behave differently and it is not a required package by any means.  I don't
> have it on any of my systems because I know where executables are
> (*everything* is in /bin, there is no /sbin or /usr or any of that
> nonsense ;-) )

Sorry for butting in here butt, I think David asked for "reasonable" cases 
which does not have bash. Not to sound sarcastic but no matter what you ask 
about and how de-facto and established it is you will find a Linux system 
that does not have it. Either it is a LFS system, toaster, satellite or some 
other obscure thing you easily encounter in the linux world..

To put it in another way - is it only your site, Casey, which does not have 
bash or is there other users of substansial count? You do see what this leads 
to? :)

Or, the usual disclaimer - I could just gotten everything wrong.

Cheers!


			Frans



 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]