From: jont AT harlequin DOT co DOT uk (Jon Thackray)
Subject: Re: type command
5 May 1998 20:02:26 -0700
Message-ID: <199805051100.MAA17153.cygnus.gnu-win32@zaphod.long.harlequin.co.uk>
References: <354a8ca1 DOT 3364646 AT smtp DOT goodnet DOT com>
To: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

jeffdbREMOVETHIS AT goodnet DOT com writes:
 > On Fri, 1 May 1998 10:44:44 +0100, you wrote:
 > 
 > >Bob McGowan writes:
 > > > In b19, the sh.exe is a different shell, based on something called ash.
 > > > It does not support the shell built-in command "type" (to check, run
 > > > "sh"
 > > > from the bash command line, then put in the command "type type".  The
 > > > ash
 > > > shell generates the output "type: not found" while bash says "type is a
 > > > shell builtin").  The make is probably running "sh" so if it is actually
 > > > ash then you have problems.  Rename sh.exe to ash.exe (if you want to
 > > > keep
 > > > it), then copy bash.exe to sh.exe.  Hopefully this will fix the problem.
 > >
 > >Given that ash.exe is no use for commands like make, is there a good
 > >reason why sh.exe, which one is recommended to copy into /bin so that
 > >it is available for make, is actually ash.exe, which is no use for
 > >make?
 > 
 > Incorrect, ash.exe is the only /bin/sh that will work under win95
 > to configure/compile the CDK
 > 
 > /bin/sh == bash.exe crashes 95
 > so does make check in the ...src/bash dir of the CDK

Well, perhaps this should be in the README or FAQ (perhaps it is, and
I've just missed it). However, using ash as /bin/sh does not work
properly under NT, it loses bits of the path. Using bash as /bin/sh
does work under NT. Win95 is of no interest to me as a development
system, as it is simply not robust enough.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".