[net.unix] Dumb question: does 8th Edition "sh" treat "$0" in a new way?

alan@drivax.UUCP (Alan Fargusson) (12/30/84)

> The challenge here seems to be that our 4.1bsd "sh" expands "$0" to
> "/mnt/ado/bin/2" rather than to "2"; when "pr" sees "-/mnt/ado/bin/2" in its
> argument list it gets quarrelsome.

I think you are using 'csh', and not 'sh'. On our UN*X (System V rel.2)
'sh' will work. On another system here we have Eunice which I think is
BSD 4.1, and 'csh' does what you describe, but 'sh' works fine. I also
found that if '2' is placed in the current directory it work with 'csh'.
Apperently the 'csh' people thought we would want full path names.
-- 

Alan Fargusson.

{ ihnp4, sftig, amdahl, ucscc, ucbvax!unisoft }!drivax!alan