Re: Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts

[Stephen Harris <lists@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:54:48AM -0400, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
> Even though Solaris started using ksh as the default user environment, 
> almost all of the start scrips were either bourne or bash scripts.  With 
> Bash having more functionality the scripts typically used the 
> environment that suited the requirements best.

Bash is a better command shell for many people, but ksh has better
scripting ability (eg typescript options bash has never seen).
Many Solaris provided scripts were ksh.

Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88
licensing problems.  Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting
course to my local LUG, but AT&T (David Korn himsef!) told me I couldn't
give people copies of the shell to take home.

(Finally, too late in the day, they changed their licensing).

-- 

rgds
Stephen
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos