Problem with mutt script

Derek Martin invalid at
Tue Apr 17 19:28:17 UTC 2018

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 09:26:51AM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:18:57AM -0400, Aaron Schrab wrote:
> > At 15:41 +0200 16 Apr 2018, Gero Treuner <gero-mutt at> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 07:53:56AM -0500, Paul Keusemann wrote:
> > > > { [ -e ".git" ] && command -v git >/dev/null 2>&1; } \
> > > > || exec cat VERSION
> > > > 
> > > > does not work when run in a bourne shell.  The -e option is not supported in
> Whoops, thank you Paul for pointing this out.

One wonders what systems these are, and whether this is even worth
considering.  If it is, I believe Bourne shell allows compound tests
like the following: 

  [ -f $file -o -d $file ]

which I believe would cover it, though I don't have access to a
machine that currently has an original Bourne shell to test.  It is
becoming rather difficult to find on-line references to syntax for the
(now obsolete) original Bourne shell.  Most such refereces I can find
actually refer to bash, ksh, or other POSIX shell variants.

Wasn't there some recent-ish notion that Mutt would now require
vaguely modern (i.e. C99-compliant) systems to compile?  If so,
doesn't that implicitly include having a /bin/sh that is POSIX?

Derek D. Martin   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Mutt-dev mailing list