Matthew Burgess wrote: > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:58:45 -0700, Dan Nicholson <dbn.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Matthew Burgess >> <matt...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >>> Given that LFS only installs bash, does any of this matter? :) >> A while back I sanitized the bootscripts for POSIX sh compatibility, >> and I think DJ has been maintaining that goal. I think it's a nice >> (and obtainable) goal to target since having sh != bash can save on >> bloat. > > Yes, I agree that's a reasonable objective. So, do we want to move '[' > and 'test' to /bin then, just in case the user installs a shell > that doesn't include builtins for those utilities?
I would really go the other way and make all the scripts start with #!/bin/bash and use the features of bash. When we use the lowest common denominator, we prevent progress. If someone wants to use dash or another incomplete shell as a default, then they should customize the startup scripts too. The same thing goes if the user wants to use tcsh or ksh as a default. Using alternative shells should be a hint or other suitable reference. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
