Re: /bin/bash vs. /bin/sh
Brian Gallew (bg11@eden.as.cmu.edu)
Mon, 18 Sep 1995 14:07:05 -0400
> On Sun, 17 Sep 1995, Andrew Tristan wrote:
> I personally found that the smallest, most compatible Bourne shell I could
> make was by taking out all the non-Bourne-shell options from pdksh; I got
> it down to 108 KB (ELF) and it could probably be made smaller. At any
> rate this is much smaller than a minimal version of Bash, though both work
> quite well. Ash, OTOH, is nowhere near compatible with Bourne Shell
> (though it is nice and small). One other bad Bourne Shell clone is SCO's
> /bin/sh, which is very different from sh on any modern UNIX (I would call
> it broken, but maybe it's just antique).
Try the /bin/sh on DYNIX:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root daemon 28672 Jan 7 1990 /.bin/sh*
It doesn't support functions, either. (it's statically linked)
It's also "UNIX System V Release 2.0 i386 Version 2"