Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site teddy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!teddy!jpn
From: jpn@teddy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Please do NOT use "/bin/test" as a command name
Message-ID: <1803@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Dec-85 09:02:15 EST
Article-I.D.: teddy.1803
Posted: Thu Dec 12 09:02:15 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Dec-85 07:48:25 EST
References: <313@bdaemon.UUCP> <13400016@mirror.UUCP> <1016@sdcsla.UUCP> <1019@utcs.uucp> <1747@dciem.UUCP> <1023@utcs.uucp> <151@ms.UUCP>
Reply-To: jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 16
Keywords: PATH, shell scripts, absolute names, aliases, csh

>What about personal aliases conflicting with csh script commands.  For
>example, many people around here alias rm to rm -i.  This would break
>many csh scripts.  The PATH solution given in geoff's article would not
>solve this problem.

Assuming you are talking about csh aliases, this does not come up in
"sh" scripts (which was what the discussion was about).  If you are
writing csh scripts, then I hope your kernel also supports the "#! xxx"
shell hack, or else the csh script startup times may be prohibatively
long.  If your kernel supports this, then use "#! /bin/csh -f" to avoid
loading the user's .cshrc.

>Of course, a *very* conscientious programmer could unalias every
>potentially conflicting name he uses in a script. :-)

How about "unalias *"?