From: sens@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU (Sunando Sen) Subject: Re: shells that emulate the orginal /bin/sh Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1993 23:15:52 GMT
In article <243for$ann@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding) writes:
>From: bf703@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Patrick J. Volkerding)
>
>
>I found ash.tar-z on wuarchive.wustl.edu in /mirrors/unix-c/utils.
>Haven't been able to get it to port yet, though. I get the whole thing
>to compile (including the bltinlib.a) and then it dies trying to link
>builtins.o. If anyone has better luck, let me know...
>
>--
>Patrick Volkerding
>volkerdi@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu
>bf703@cleveland.freenet.edu
I was told the latest ash can be found sun-lamp.cs.berkeley.edu in the
directory /pub/NetBSD-current/src/bin/sh. I have picked up a copy and
have managed to compile it. It seems to handle the `configure' scripts that
come with most GNU packages without problems; which is about the most I will
ever need, since I am very unlikely to write a shell script myself that will
really test the capability of a shell. For example, ksh had trouble with
the configure scripts of gzip and shellutils-1.8 (it produced spurious
quotes in the makefile for gzip and completely hung during running the
configure script of the shellutils package). But ash had no problem at
all. The executable is about 64k, which is smaller than ksh. Hope this
helps.
Sincerely,
Sunando Sen