Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!odin!chet
From: chet@odin.INS.CWRU.Edu (Chet Ramey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell
Subject: Re: Different versions of sh
Keywords: Bourne shell arguments
Message-ID: <1991Jan18.143101.15308@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 18 Jan 91 14:31:01 GMT
References: <1991Jan2.174157.21530@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <1440@tardis.Tymnet.COM>
Sender: news@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Reply-To: chet@po.CWRU.Edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: odin.ins.cwru.edu

In article <1440@tardis.Tymnet.COM> jms@tardis.Tymnet.COM (Joe Smith) writes:
>From the discription, it sounds like the sh that Sun ships with SunOS-3.5
>and later is much closer to the ATT version than the BSD version.
>Is this a correct interpretation?

Yes.  The version of sh shipped in SunOS 3.x (x >= 0, I think -- Guy Harris
will catch me if I'm wrong) is based on the V.2 /bin/sh, with mods from the
BRL version of that shell to fix up it's baroque memory management a bit.

Starting with SunOS 4.0, the Sun sh is derived from the V.3 sh.

Chet
-- 
Chet Ramey				``There's just no surf in
Network Services Group			  Cleveland, U.S.A. ...''
Case Western Reserve University
chet@ins.CWRU.Edu		My opinions are just those, and mine alone.