MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4AE613F4.4080108@cygwin.com>
References: <4AE60FFF.7080909@cs.umass.edu> <4AE613F4.4080108@cygwin.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:18:13 -0400
Message-ID: <f60fe000910262218w79dff551gaf92a289cf1101c6@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ash "gotcha", other 1.7 upgrade wrinles
From: "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@gmail.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
> It is not gratuitous. =C2=A0'ash' is now 'dash' instead of 'bash'. =C2=A0=
Dash is a
> more standards compliant shell which is also faster.

Huh? ash was never bash, and ash.exe was part of the dash package last
I checked, so I'm confused by the above statement.

Ash is the Almquist Shell, and Bash is the Bourne-Again Shell.  Ash is
designed to be lightweight and fast while (mostly) achieving POSIX
compliance, while Bash is designed to be feature-rich and as
POSIX-compliant as you want (plus some compliance with non-POSIX
features of the Korn Shell thrown in for good measure, along with lots
of purely idiosyncratic Bashisms).

Both are inspired by the original UNIX Bourne shell, but as far as I
can tell they have no actual code in common with it or each other.

Dash (the Debian Almquist Shell) is the port of ash to Linux, which
has since had further development...

--=20
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@gmail.com>

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple