Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site houligan.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!akguc!codas!peora!ucf-cs!novavax!houligan!daemon
From: daemon@houligan.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Re: Please do NOT use /bin/test as a command name
Message-ID: <243@houligan.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Dec-85 11:58:42 EST
Article-I.D.: houligan.243
Posted: Sat Dec 21 11:58:42 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Dec-85 23:37:09 EST
Sender: daemon@houligan.UUCP
Organization: Gould Electronics, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Lines: 26

In article <6224@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:
>> As a compromise, how about setting PATH at the beginning of the script?
>
> This is not a compromise, it is the correct and complete solution.  Don't
> forget to do "export PATH".

I think that it would depend on the application.  It is possible that
the user has directories in his PATH which would not be found by "sub-
commands" if you "export" the PATH.  In general, I set the PATH, but
do not "export" it, and this seems to work well.  Especially if one of
the effects of the script is to call up another shell (rarely) or the
editor (more common).  Then, the user can still use all the commands
he's used to.

Sorry if the topic wasn't clear here.  I was only discussing the point
of "export"ing PATH.  I agree that setting PATH is the best solution.

--tgi

	while (--tgi)	/* my mind continues to decay */
		;	/* even though I do nothing.. */    

{brl-bmd,ccvaxa,pur-ee,sun}!csd-gould!midas!tgi (Craig Strickland @ Gould)
305/587-2900 x5014  CompuServe: 76545,1007   Source: BDQ615   MCIMail: 272-3350

(echo ".ft B"; echo ".ps 999"; echo "$disclaimer") | troff -t	# :-)