In article ,
Chet Ramey wrote:
>On 9/17/14, 3:07 AM, Aharon Robbins wrote:
>
>>> I've considered emulating it everywhere, regardless of what the OS
>>> provides, but I'd get just as many complaints if I did that.
>>>
>>> Chet
>>
>> This is what gawk does. I haven't had any complaints about this,
On 9/18/14, 4:29 AM, Aharon Robbins wrote:
>> Sure. It's a choice between internal and external consistency. If I
>> emulated /dev/std* (and maybe /dev/fd/*) internally in bash, bash would
>> behave the same everywhere, but, as Andreas said, I'd get questions
>> about why `foo -o /dev/stdout' an
Chet Ramey wrote:
> Yes, on this one. There are others; recall the `discussion' about
> whether bash should choose between /dev/fd or FIFOs for process
> substitution at runtime.
That's a tougher one. It's a question of how far back do you wish
to continue supporting systems?
I'm finding that
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 07:26:33AM -0600, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
> I'm finding that modern systems have pretty much the union of things
> that I need, and also that the older ones that don't simply aren't
> in use anymore. E.g., do you still need to support SunOS 4.1.x? Ultrix?
> OSF/1? Irix?
W
On 9/18/14, 9:26 AM, arn...@skeeve.com wrote:
> Chet Ramey wrote:
>
>> Yes, on this one. There are others; recall the `discussion' about
>> whether bash should choose between /dev/fd or FIFOs for process
>> substitution at runtime.
>
> That's a tougher one. It's a question of how far back do yo
