Re: Several reasons why debian should not use bash for /bin/sh
Chris Ulrich wrote:
> I'm new to debian but I'm not new to either unix or linux. I recently
> installed debian on my laptop. On my prior linux setup, I had pdksh as
> /bin/sh. While I sometimes had problems with scripts, I never ran into
> showstoppers. When I made ash or pdksh /bin/sh on my debian setup, things
> stopped working. I consider this to be a serious problem with debian.
If there are still scripts that have "#! /bin/sh" at the top but use
non-plain-bourne shell commands, i.e. bashisms, this is a bug in that
very package. To fix this somebody has to file appropriate bugreports
and let the maintainer do their job.
> Speed: bash is much slower than ash or pdksh. From init scripts to
> cron or day to day shell scripts, /bin/sh gets run many thousands
> of times. Because bash is slower, this results in a slower
> feeling machine. For example my computer boots noticeably faster
> when I use pdksh or ash instead of bash.
Maybe this is time for me to add a comment. Bash scripts can be used
to increas the speed of scripts extremly. When your script calls awk,
cut, grep, perl etc. it *is* slow. Much of the functionality is also
available in plain bash.
> Safety: Bash, at least in the debian distribution I've installed, is linked
> against 5 libraries (readline, curses, dl, c and ld-linux). If
> any one of these libraries gets hosed, /bin/sh stops working and
> this effectively kills the system. A smaller, simpler shell would
> be less vulnerable to library problems.
This has shown to be a problem when the first people killed^H^H^H^H^H^Hconverted
their system from libc5 to libc6.
> Compatibility: People are tempted to (and in fact do) write scripts that
> use bash specific extensions when explicitly calling /bin/sh.
These are bugs that have to be reported.
Regards,
Joey
--
There are lies, statistics and benchmarks.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: