[Slackbuilds-users] Patch proposal to remove bashisms from some scripts
donaldcallen at gmail.com
Tue Nov 2 20:15:27 UTC 2010
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:30 PM, B Watson <yalhcru at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/2/10, Max Miorim <miorimmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Unless we're talking about using either /bin/bash or /bin/sh, the
> > problem that I see with this is that it would open the precedence to
> > accept submissions of scripts using other shells like csh and zsh,
> > that could be a problem for the people that review the scripts, as
> > they'd have to learn the particularities of other shells - it could
> > slow down the process of review->approval considerably.
> Yah, I hadn't thought about csh. Definitely agree the rule should be
> /bin/bash, or /bin/sh for scripts that were tested with ash.
> > the same thing that took 16.702 seconds using bash as /bin/sh took
> > 6.803 with ash and pretty much the same happens to every script that
> > we tested.
> Interesting. Never even occurred to me to test performance, I expect
> interpreters to be slow, and at least subconsciously I was aware that bash
> is bloated... but wouldn't have guessed ash would be *that* much faster.
> Hm. I just now thought I'd try a couple of things in ash, as an
> interactive shell, on slack64 13.1, and the damn thing segfaulted halfway
> through typing the first command. /me runs off to do some more testing...
Yes, but it was really fast until it blew up ....
I've had the same experience in search of a less bloated browser than
Firefox (really solid, reliable code of significant complexity is not so
easy to come by). They all make sense, according to their developers, until
you try to use them in real-life situations.
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> Archives - http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - http://slackbuilds.org/faq/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SlackBuilds-users