From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: usotsuki@buric.co (Steve Nickolas)
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 21:22:15 -0400 (EDT)
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: <alpine.BSF.2.02.1607142121420.90753@frieza.hoshinet.org>

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Dave Horsfall 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?
>
> By the way, on both Mac and FreeBSD (I can't be bothered checking my
> Penguin box) "true" and "false" are binaries (and aren't even linked).
>
>

$ file $(which true) $(which false)
/bin/true:  ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), 
dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, 
BuildID[sha1]=0x347aaa1fa815d6689723e6f8aa0f7207566b6aba, stripped
/bin/false: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), 
dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, 
BuildID[sha1]=0x821c6a0a4331413fb4b562b623c6bd5ca0a707f6, stripped

-uso.