Mail Archives: djgpp/2003/02/07/18:42:42
> > i respectfully disagree with you in practical terms, in
> > terms of compatibility, and in terms of the bash man page.
> >
> > it is not compatible with RH Linux/FreeBSD, whether using
> > bash, or standard sh. and it is breaking many things for me.
> >
> > it doesn't make much sense for it to be as it is in DJGPP.
> > of course you should be able to pass a script an option.
> > who would argue with that ...
> >
> > BASH(1): If the program is a file beginning with #!, the remainder
> > of the first line specifies an interpreter for the pro-
> > gram. The shell executes the specified interpreter on
> > operating systems that do not handle this executable for-
> > mat themselves. The arguments to the interpreter[1] consist
> > of a single optional argument[2] following the interpreter
> > name on the first line of the program, followed by the
> > name of the program[3], followed by the command arguments[4],
> > if any.
> >
> > 1 2 3 4
> > #!INTERPRETER OPTIONAL-ARG NAME-OF-PROGRAM OPTIONAL-COMMAND-ARGUMENTS
> > ----------- ------------ --------------- --------------------------
> > thus, what i am doing is within bash guidelines and should work
> > and should be acceptable practice. if you still disagree, i would
> > like to see the standards you reference - to enlighten myself.
> > i admit i may be wrong, but i don't see it yet. i do not
> > know of any references that demand "single argument" treatment.
> >
> > thank you for your work, it's greatly valued!
> >
> > > > /path/to/sh/script option: /path/to/sh/script option: no such
> > > > file or directory (ENOENT)
> > >
> > > This is correct. According to the standards, the text after the
> > > #!/bin/bash is NOT parsed, but treated as a single argument.
- Raw text -