On 04/27/2016 05:20 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
While older versions of the Bourne Shell are not POSIX compliant, recent versions only miss the feature "arithmetic expansion" and are otherwise probably closer to POSIX than bash or dash. Note that "dash" does not support multi-byte characters and thus cannot be certified for a full UNIX system but only for embedded UNIX systems.
That's good to know. But, since there seem to be several forks of Bourne shell, currently, is there a reference for the differences between them?
As far as I can see, this was related to "mailx" and not to the shell.
I looked for substantiation of the original claim that the bourne shell had security problems. Apparently I should have looked closer. Thanks for catching that.
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
