Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Thomas de Roo wrote:
>
>> OK, so I checked again. I issued
>>
>> cd /bin
>> ln -s dash sh
>>
>> and rebooted. A lot of the bootscripts fail, both LFS and BLFS, from
>> blfs-bootscripts-20120828 and lfs-bootscripts-20121013. So I
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2011 22:19:58 +0200
> Erik Blomqvist wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I hope this is the right mailing list for this question. If nothing else
> you
> > seem to be the right people to ask.
> &
Erik Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hope this is the right mailing list for this question. If nothing else you
> seem to be the right people to ask.
>
> Considering that dash and mawk are smaller and faster than bash and gawk I
> was a bit surprised to find that LFS doesn
On Thu, 5 May 2011 22:19:58 +0200
Erik Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hope this is the right mailing list for this question. If nothing else you
> seem to be the right people to ask.
>
> Considering that dash and mawk are smaller and faster than bash and gawk I
> was a bit s
On May 5, 2011, at 3:19 PM, Erik Blomqvist wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I hope this is the right mailing list for this question. If nothing else you
> seem to be the right people to ask.
>
> Considering that dash and mawk are smaller and faster than bash and gawk I
> was a bit surpr
Hi,
I hope this is the right mailing list for this question. If nothing else you
seem to be the right people to ask.
Considering that dash and mawk are smaller and faster than bash and gawk I
was a bit surprised to find that LFS doesn't support them. Even Ubuntu, that
is a huge distributi
uess,
>>> for now, BLFS could have a patch to dash to add LC_COLLATE=C to the
> other
>>> call to sort in src/mkbuiltins.
>>
>> Yeah, I'd send that upstream and cc Herbert Xu.
>
> Only one problem, it still doesn't help! The problem is that LANG,
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 09:54:33AM -0600, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Ah, it does, but only on an earlier invocation of sort! So, I guess, for
> now, BLFS could have a patch to dash to add LC_COLLATE=C to the other
> call to sort in src/mkbuiltins.
>
> Longer-term though, we certai
On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 09:04:44 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Matthew
> Burgess wrote:
>>
>> Ah, it does, but only on an earlier invocation of sort! So, I guess,
>> for now, BLFS could have a patch to dash to add LC_COLLATE=C to the othe
n
>>> patch for Coreutils causes a problem during compilation of
>>> Dash in BLFS. The attached builtins file produces the following
>>> output when we compile Coreutils with the i18n patch:
>>>
>>> $ LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
>>> $ sort -u -k 3,3 builtin
On Sat, 15 Aug 2009 08:13:38 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Matthew
> Burgess wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Following a thread on blfs-support[0], it looks like the i18n
>> patch for Coreutils causes a problem during compilation of
>>
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 7:53 AM, Matthew
Burgess wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Following a thread on blfs-support[0], it looks like the i18n
> patch for Coreutils causes a problem during compilation of
> Dash in BLFS. The attached builtins file produces the following
> output when we comp
Hi,
Following a thread on blfs-support[0], it looks like the i18n
patch for Coreutils causes a problem during compilation of
Dash in BLFS. The attached builtins file produces the following
output when we compile Coreutils with the i18n patch:
$ LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
$ sort -u -k 3,3 builtins
0
we want to change standards towards a directions then
we have go to their lists and trying to convince them. They are
pretty conservative people, if you leave out Urlich Drepper.
> As I understand it, dash is not a bash replacement, but rather an sh
> replacement.
Its not a replace
g flavors of
UNIX, but this is also politically motivated.
As I understand it, dash is not a bash replacement, but rather an sh
replacement. For those of you who have a distro that attempts (either by
asking or not) to install dash as sh, what is the default interactive
shell? *If* dash is not mean
On 3/23/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 03/23/07 18:20 CST:
> > On 3/23/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I don't see an issue. Perhaps a short sentence (in para form) after
> >> the "Package Information" bullets noting the differe
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 03/23/07 18:20 CST:
> On 3/23/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I don't see an issue. Perhaps a short sentence (in para form) after
>> the "Package Information" bullets noting the difference in the name,
>> though they are the same files.
>
> As lo
On 3/23/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't see an issue. Perhaps a short sentence (in para form) after
> the "Package Information" bullets noting the difference in the name,
> though they are the same files.
As long as you don't see an issue, I don't feel like cluttering up
prefer not to do the LC_ALL=C thing in patch, though. If
> > it must be a patch, it would have to be a separate one.
>
> There are ~8 commits upstream since 0.5.3. Most of them are bug fixes
> that we might want, but some seem like they are trivial corner cases.
> Ubuntu only applies
.
There are ~8 commits upstream since 0.5.3. Most of them are bug fixes
that we might want, but some seem like they are trivial corner cases.
Ubuntu only applies two of the commits, and they use dash as /bin/sh.
One of the commits is to add libedit support, which requires the
autotools be regene
20 matches
Mail list logo
