Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Roy Marples <uberlord@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Network configuration and bash
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:29:23
Message-Id: 20070206232632.4d91d7c8@uberpc.marples.name
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Network configuration and bash by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 21:28:04 +0000
2 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote:
3
4 > I think it's more that you're expected to justify *why* the bash
5 > requirement is so bad, given the cost of changing.
6
7 1) Lack of choice.
8 Gentoo is all about giving the user choice. baselayout even supports
9 other init systems when requested.
10
11 2) Speed.
12 Bash is one of the slowest shells around for looping.
13 However, it also requires less forking due to it's nice built-ins. This
14 does of course only work with bash and not other shells.
15
16 3) What's the cost of *not* changing away from bash?
17 I would say that bash is the best shell around in terms of features and
18 ease of use, however that is not without cost. That cost is new bash
19 versions consistently breaking baselayout, ebuilds and configure files.
20
21 4) Size.
22 Because bash has all these nice features it's large, hence unsuitable
23 for low memory or low disk space environments.
24
25 5) I'm *just* talking about config files here.
26 If users want to run bash, that's fine and I won't stop them. They can
27 also use bash in their init script if they so wish as I plan to support
28 something like so
29
30 depend() {
31 shell bash
32 }
33
34 And voila, problem solved. Of course, that's just an idea I just had.
35 However, I also think that baselayout provided services should not
36 require bash for the above reasons, hence the need for a new config.
37
38 Hopefully I've justified this enough :)
39
40 Thanks
41
42 Roy
43 --
44 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Network configuration and bash Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Network configuration and bash "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn@g.o>