DVM - D Version Manager

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:24:56 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:

> On 2011-01-26 14:58, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 03:36:24 -0500, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-01-25 23:59, Jesse Phillips wrote:
>>>> Jacob Carlborg Wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I guess you're right, didn't think there were a lot people who
>>>>> used other shells. Since I almost know nothing about shell scripting
>>>>> and
>>>>> even less about non-bourne shells, will it be possible to port to  
>>>>> other
>>>>> shells? How much do they differ?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> /Jacob Carlborg
>>>>
>>>> To add to Lutger's message. I believe it is sh that is required by
>>>> all Posix systems, or at least an equivalent. Similarly I think vi is
>>>> also a requirement.
>>>>
>>>> In all likelyhood you probably used a Bash specific feature, but
>>>> usually everyone has bash even if they use zsh... Though
>>>> Ubuntu/Debian has started pointing /bin/sh to dash which is complaint
>>>> with posix...
>>>
>>> Ok. I'll see I can use only sh.
>>
>> FWIW, /bin/sh is usually a symlink to bash, and it makes bash behave
>> like the original Bourne Shell.
>
> /bin/sh is not a symlink on Mac OS X. I guess I just can try to use sh  
> instead of bash.

Yes, it should limit you to /bin/sh supported commands

>
>> I typically find /bin/sh features to be enough for implementing most
>> scripts.
>
> I have no idea. I need to be able use the following commands/functions:
>
> export, source, builtin hash, rm, echo, exit, exec

export => supported, but has a more limited syntax than bash
source => supported via .
builtin hash => supported
rm => command (shell independent)
exit => supported
exec => supported

-Steve