similar to: How can rpm "%{SUMMARY}" not be consistent?

In preparing to answer a question about some yum undesired behavior, I wanted to reference fastest mirror info, but when I went to https://wiki.centos.org/PackageManagement/Yum/FastestMirror I find all the text has been squished to the right hand side of the page and made 1 word wide all the way down. The https://wiki.centos.org/FrontPage looks similar but perhaps it is a little better? Or is

On 04/26/16 21:13, John R Pierce wrote: > On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote: >> >> Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, >> one of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well >> that's all news to me, and I cannot find anything online to >> corroborate the claim. Is this true, is it a bash vs. Bourne FUD, or

On 04/27/16 13:21, Pouar wrote: > On 04/27/16 08:49, William A. Mahaffey III wrote: >> On 04/26/16 21:13, John R Pierce wrote: >>> On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote: >>>> Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, >>>> one of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well >>>> that's all news to me,

Scott Robbins wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 07:27:26PM -0700, Alice Wonder wrote: >> >> Some of the BSDs use to have a bourne shell and maybe some do, I don't know. >> > Yup. > >> bash is mostly compatible with bourne (can run most bourne scripts) which is why /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash on GNU and most other *nix systems. > > Bash can run

On Fri, 11 Sep 2015, Denniston, Todd A CIV NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane wrote: > If anyone has clues on how to build and add just a portion of > gst-plugins-bad into the existing EL OS set of gstreamer plugins, please > share (even URL pointers). > > [1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/gstreamer/gst-plugins-bad/tree/ext/openh264 > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenH264 > [3]

On 26/04/16 10:07 PM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote: >> >> Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, one >> of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well that's >> all news to me, and I cannot find anything online to corroborate the >> claim. Is this true, is it a bash vs. Bourne FUD, or

>>> >>last OS I can think of with an actual Bourne shell was Solaris. >>> >> >>> >> >> > >> >The various *BSD's have & use the actual Bourne shell .... >> > >> > > Which one? All the BSDs I know of use the Almquist Shell except for > OpenBSD which uses a patched version of the Public Domain Korn Shell

<m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > Ah. I don't remember if I was using csh, or ksh, and didn't realize about > bash. I *think* I vaguely remember that sh seemed to be more capable than > I remembered. If you like to check what the Bourne Shell did support in the late 1980s, I recommend you to fetch recent Schily tools from:

Dear all, During a recent package submission, we were highlighted that some lines in our configure script didn't follow the correct syntax. The lines looked like this: x=$(($y/10)) We were indicated at the time that this is because the statement does not use Bourne shell syntax, which is absolutely true, and also that the manual warns about this, which is true again. So far everything

Hello List, Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, one of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues. Well that's all news to me, and I cannot find anything online to corroborate the claim. Is this true, is it a bash vs. Bourne FUD, or something else? Thanks, Jack

Manish Jain wrote: > > On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and installed the version you indicated, but >>>> I >>>> get nothing at all: >>>> >>>> /home/bourne # teamviewer

>>>>> I?aki ?car writes: Same from here: in addition to what the standards say, it always pays to be defensive and check "Portable Shell Programming" in the Autoconf manual. Among other things, this says '$((EXPRESSION))' Arithmetic expansion is not portable as some shells (most notably Solaris 10 '/bin/sh') don't support it. motivating

On 12/19/2017 03:57 PM, Manish Jain wrote: > > > On 12/20/17 01:45, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Manish Jain wrote: >>> >>> On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and

Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > The schily tools act as a container to publish the current code state. There is > > no such maintained web page. > > I was referring to the summary on the SourceForge page, where you just list the contents of the package without explaining why one would want to download it. I thought I don't need to make advertizing for

On 12/19/2017 02:57 PM, Manish Jain wrote: > > > On 12/20/17 01:45, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Manish Jain wrote: >>> >>> On 12/19/17 22:11, Manish Jain wrote: >>>> On 12/19/17 22:07, Jonathan Billings wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 02:54:36PM +0000, Manish Jain wrote: >>>>>> I uninstalled the old TV, and

On 12/19/17 19:55, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 12/19/2017 07:16 AM, Manish Jain wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am writing a book about Unix (Linux / FreeBSD) and my book needs >> documentation for TeamViewer13 running under Centos 7 (64-bit). >> >> Unfortunately, running TeamViewer does not get me a GUI -- the install >> went smoothly and teamviewerd daemon is

Johnny (& other CentOS folks), Am I being fooled by some proxies between me and centos (and all the centos mirrors, which what I normally use), or has the repodata for CentOS 5.9 updates not been updated since 03-Jun-2013 12:08? I was under the impression that the repodata on the main centos servers was updated about the same time as any CentOS-announce message going out, unless I also see a

Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > On Apr 27, 2015, at 4:38 AM, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > > > This is the SVr4 Bourne Shell, so you need to take into account what has been > > added with Svr4: > > Is there any difference between your osh and the Heirloom Bourne Shell? > >

Full_Name: Gordon Lack Version: 2.4.0 OS: OSF1 v5.1 Submission from: (NULL) (198.28.92.5) Changes to the bin/R front-end interlude script at 2.4.0 (cf: 2.2.0) have broken R on (Dec/Compaq/HP) OSF1. There are 3 occurrences of "${@}", but this is the incorrect syntax for adding $@, as on older Bourne shells this will add an empty (but present) parameter. The result is that the build

> -----Original Message----- > From: Les Mikesell [mailto:lesmikesell at gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:25 PM > To: CentOS mailing list > Subject: Re: [CentOS] How should I reinstall CentOS? > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Michael Hennebry > <hennebry at web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu> wrote: > > <SNIP> > > > I'm not willing to