From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: arnold@skeeve.com (arnold@skeeve.com)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 20:25:27 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] Shell control through external commands
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.11.1607151050240.65801@aneurin.horsfall.org>
References: <4fcf31ef-50af-10b5-0c34-ad647ed10a4e@aueb.gr>
 <CAC20D2Mho6xh+LPucpXmt7QjJge+qc59LYaF+wfhrm3QVOLpWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.BSF.2.11.1607150835460.65801@aneurin.horsfall.org>
 <20160714224939.GA35271@server.rulingia.com>
 <CAH_OBieVFzPn93L8=_fmbUycZ7UmYdXiopC0vgei6RGDZp0mHw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH_OBie_6gFy+BqkCMj+sr0NqTMNOQxvgWf6SQnHMJpn7DAytA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH_OBidB9EsULxX1+nY=Mg4SJ20OqCa+6eBk2KOPU-S_81hihw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.BSF.2.11.1607151050240.65801@aneurin.horsfall.org>
Message-ID: <201607150225.u6F2PRVd026389@freefriends.org>

Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Jul 2016, shawn wilson wrote:
>
> > I've always been curious though - what was the reason behind 
> > implementing /bin/[ ? IDK any shell where this isn't implemented - I 
> > always assumed it's a POSIX compatibility stopgap older systems needed 
> > to stay compliant with their shipped shell.
>
> To implement:
>
>     [ blah ]
>
> when it wasn't a built-in (there were few built-ins in those days).
>
> I have no idea why it's still there...  A Posix requirement, along with 
> really unsafe functions?

Consider

	execlp("[", "-f", "/some/file", "]", NULL);

Then [ and test need to live in the filesystem.

Arnold