Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!bu.edu!xylogics!loverso.leom.ma.us!john From: john@loverso.leom.ma.us (John Robert LoVerso) Newsgroups: comp.sys.encore Subject: Re: Problems with /bin/sh and /usr/old/sh Keywords: bourne shell Message-ID: <03Feb91.225250@loverso.leom.ma.us> Date: 4 Feb 91 03:54:38 GMT References: <101@clapton.austek.oz> Sender: loverso@Xylogics.COM Reply-To: John Robert LoVerso Organization: John & Sue's House, Leominster MA Lines: 28 Return-Path: John Robert LoVerso Return-Path: John Robert LoVerso This came up a few months ago. Last time I checked, the /bin/sh under UMAX4.3 (R4_0) was the 4.3BSD (maybe "-tahoe") /bin/sh. Whereas, the /usr/old/sh was the UMAX4.2 R3_x /bin/sh, which was from the BRL distribution of the SysVr2 Bourne shell. The problems you listed exist because either those features didn't exist in the circa-1978 /bin/sh now found in UMAX, or because they are bugs fixed since then in the SysV /bin/sh. It's a strange bug that /usr/old/sh doesn't glob on NFS mounted file systems - it could be a problem in its use of the standard directory reading routines. If you haven't reported it to Encore, you should. And don't forget to tell them you'd like the modern Bourne shell be the supported one under Umax4.3! As for other things you can try: If you have a UMAX V machine around, try the /bin/sh from there. It is guaranteed to be a modern /bin/sh. Because Encore, much to their credit, has kept all the different operating systems for the Multimax binary compatible (i.e., even with their MACH release), it has a good chance of working. You could also try the GNU Shell, Bash, but I've never had any direct experience with it and it is still under active development. John -- John Robert LoVerso John & Sue's House, Leominster MA