From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 3632 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2022 20:02:59 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 30 Dec 2022 20:02:59 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA74423A3;
	Sat, 31 Dec 2022 06:02:54 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B01C3423A1
	for <tuhs@tuhs.org>; Sat, 31 Dec 2022 06:02:48 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546)
	id 74DE135E845; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 12:02:46 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 12:02:46 -0800
From: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>
To: Chet Ramey <chet.ramey@case.edu>
Message-ID: <20221230200246.GW5825@mcvoy.com>
References: <52FB6638-AEFF-4A4F-8C2E-32089D577BA0@planet.nl>
 <464819f0-d2f6-2a60-6481-a194f4428b4d@case.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <464819f0-d2f6-2a60-6481-a194f4428b4d@case.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Message-ID-Hash: 6KGPXHLAJAJLLTG4I5UDNGAD22VTL4YS
X-Message-ID-Hash: 6KGPXHLAJAJLLTG4I5UDNGAD22VTL4YS
X-MailFrom: lm@mcvoy.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tuhs.tuhs.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Paul Ruizendaal <pnr@planet.nl>, The Eunuchs Hysterical Society <tuhs@tuhs.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1
Precedence: list
Subject: [TUHS] Re: A few comments on porting the Bourne shell
List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list <tuhs.tuhs.org>
Archived-At: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/tuhs@tuhs.org/message/6KGPXHLAJAJLLTG4I5UDNGAD22VTL4YS/>
List-Archive: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/tuhs@tuhs.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:tuhs-request@tuhs.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tuhs-owner@tuhs.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tuhs@tuhs.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tuhs-join@tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tuhs-leave@tuhs.org>

On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 02:51:26PM -0500, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 12/30/22 1:25 PM, Paul Ruizendaal wrote:
> >
> >London and Reiser report about porting the shell that ???it required by far the largest conversion effort of any supposedly portable program, for the simple reason that it is not portable.??? By the time of SysIII this is greatly improved, but also in porting the SysIII user land it was the most complex of the set so far.
> 
> Have you read
> 
> http://www.collyer.net/who/geoff/sh.tour.pdf
> 
> and looked at http://www.collyer.net/who/geoff/v7sh.tar ?
> 
> In the limited literature on Bourne Shell porting, this is authoritative.

Is there are reason to hang on to the Bourne shell?  Maybe shell scripts?
Does it perform better than ksh or bash?

Don't get me wrong, I much prefer the sh syntax over csh syntax, but 
I'd never go back to the Bourne shell as my login shell.  Way too much
useful stuff in ksh/bash.