Re: /etc/init.d/network is too simple?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 09:24:04 -0700, Oscar Levi wrote:
>> >Big deal. Honestly, I don't see that the saving is even worth a
>> >discussion.
>> Then butt out of it if you don't find it worth your time.
>Do you think that this tone will be effective?
Well, if he doesn't consider it worth a discussion, then why is he
discussing it?
>I agree with your premise that bash is a burden when running small
>scripts. Similarly, it is sometimes worthwhile running vi to do a
>quick edit on a host that is heavily loaded or has little RAM.
s/vi/joe/ and I'll agree with you. ;)
>Is it feasible to use ash for our configuration scripts?
No, that is what perl is for.
>If it has enough of the necessary features then it seems to be a simple >choice to make. As to whether or not it is used as /bin/sh, it may work all
>right if we make the default login shell /bin/bash.
Bash or zsh, or tcsh or some other interactive shell.
>The big win here is that a stripped down machine can be made quite easily
>without affecting hosts that support interactive users. However, if ash
>won't run the majority of scripts that run on bash then we're in for a big
>battle getting it to be the default script shell.
That's just it, if a script calls #!/bin/sh and uses bashisms, then it
should have a bug filed against it. If it requires bash it should call bash
implicitely, not make the assumption that sh is bash. As for the
configuration scripts, if Debian does have a set of scripts that use bash...
Why? IIRC a lot of the basic functionality in dselect/dpkg/apt require perl.
I fail to see the need for shell script when a much better environment in
perl exists.
- --
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc
iQCVAwUBNx9St6C6xbtZwvdnAQGE9QQAl+lBggEMagpP2w5dmQwBzCu0RjpoYg1y
/5vp2oaobYxofk2E3AcxuJaa7ioN06D1HoDEUea86/cvCGKPSWwcp4esspb9gL+X
q2pTKmCD2P/Iq7TJo0XbZl91OVpVloELZIGygv8zuP2l8oIkdiuHUfVguORZPs9s
VRt3X6Fg2JI=
=q5rV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: