> Folks, I think the aim of all shell scripts in groff is to be POSIX > `sh' compatible. In case there are bashisms, they should be removed > and/or circumvented.
I second that! "sh" is the lowest common denominator on nearly all UNIX operating systems in existence. Therefore one should strive for writing the scripts for that shell if possible, for the sake of portability. At least for all the scripts that are commonly used for the software on all of the platforms. That seems especially important for such a widely used package as groff, which is required to be run on so many so different UNIX systems. In case some special extension of a non-standard (or not-so-standard) shell is need to make a script more comfortable, one could include a stripped down "sh" only version that checks for a "bash" or "ksh" or whatever and in case it finds one, switches over to a more comfortable, full-fledged version. That way you'd get the best of all worlds. Just my 2 cents. Regards, Ralph
