×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
IBM i is not Unix. It's not supposed to be Unix. It's not supposed to
work like Unix.
IBM provides QShell for that. And PASE. QShell would expand the
variables, as would any of the shells in PASE. They also support both
AIX and Linux running on the same hardware, both of which support many
shells, all of which would expand these variables?
Can't IBM give us a modern shell? They did. Many. Probably hundreds.
I sure don't expect IBM i's command-line environment (which is actually
*newer* than Unix) to act like Unix. It's not Unix, so why would it?
It supports great things, like the ability to prompt commands, the
ability to embed help inside commands, and make all command interfaces
consistent and easy to write. Easy to use and efficient work-with
panels, etc. It's a great system.
Please don't blame IBM i for being itself.
Terrence Enger wrote:
Right you are. I just tried it at V4R3, and ${varname} does not expand
the variabble. Just another case of me getting use to a beyond-POSIX
extension without realizing it, I guess. Sigh. Can IBM not give us a
modern shell?
Cheers,
Terry.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
