Re: Source style regarding here-documents
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> we aim for live-* to work with the posix subset only, in order to
> minimize the system requirements as it should be for 'bootstrap tools'
> like live-*.
I don't want to initiate a flame war on what shell to use best for task
XY and minimizing system requirements is good and all...
That said, I'd like to point out that to me, 'posix subset' for
'bootstrap tools' doesn't make much sense here. I can see your point
where you would want to use only POSIX stuff for scripts running within
the initrd context, so let's say live-boot is out of luck of getting
The bootstrapping environment on the other hand would be a full-blown
Debian installation. And even if only a "base system + live-*" was
installed...dash would be available. It just makes absolutely no sense
to self-impose such artificial limitations. What's the problem with
using dash's features when it's available anyways? Or even with defining
bash as dependency for live-*? I mean we're talking KB here and not some
dozen perl or python packages...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----