> Funny; I don't see why.  If you're worried about security, that's one thing
> (a root user should know his $PATH--this isn't setuid); if you're worried
> about compatibility, there should be no problem using which.  The binary
> /usr/bin/which (which sh uses, instead of csh's builtin) works as this
> script uses it; if it finds cc/gcc, it prints only the first instance, and
> if it doesn't, it prints nothing. 

"what christos already said."

Also, note that /usr/bin/which is not "a binary" it's a csh script,
with all of the nasty features that christos described.

If you're actually using it from sh, you're probably doing the wrong
thing; it can and will mislead you.


Why is it this way?  because that's the way it's always been, or
something.  I dunno.  However, that doesn't change the fact that it
_is_ that way, not only on NetBSD but on many/most other UN*X-ish
systems.


In my opinion, the 'right' solution for this case, if path searching
is desired, is to check the path component by component for the
searched-for file name.



cgd