@derek I seriously cannot determine if this is sarcasm or not. btw, why youtube? Linking to Odysee would better promote it and things it stands for.
@derek i thought script being able to run on /bin/sh ran in any shell? what about bashisms and fishisms? with `#/usr/bin/env sh` would the script be more certain to be compatible without having to install a specific shell?
@nergal @derek That's the basic idea. IIRC POSIX specifies that /bin/sh should be a sh-compatible shell and scripts using it should only use sh's functionality. There was a nice Debian blog post on how they switched that symlink to dash for increased performance and on the way discovered a bunch of bashisms that made them non-POSIX-compliant.
@derek only a problem on bad distros, good distros have /bin/sh linked to dash
@derek /bin/sh exists and it can be whatever you want it to be. but /bin/sh really wants to be POSIX compliant. please don't bully /bin/sh by linking non-POSIX shells to it :(
i use ksh btw
@derek I'm pretty sure it's a mistake to symlink /bin/sh to a non-POSIX compliment shell.
@derek Huh, and here I thought that /bin/sh WAS an actual POSIX-compliant shell...but if it's just a symlink to whatever the hell you have for shell then what exactly is the point of all that nonsense?
@derek /bin/sh is a *real* shell with a *real* specification and multiple, compatibile *real* implementations. You should always try to write POSIX compliant scripts if you don't have good reasons to do otherwise. Also, how could /bin/sh be the user's default shell? You can have multiple users with different login shells on your system, you know?
@derek he is obviously trolling.. lol
A mastodon instance created by Derek Taylor, creator of the DistroTube channels on YouTube and LBRY. Derek is an advocate for free and open source software.