[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles

From: Eli Schwartz
Subject: Re: "here strings" and tmpfiles
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:07:44 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

On 4/9/19 10:25 AM, konsolebox wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:39 PM Greg Wooledge <address@hidden> wrote:
>> That's incorrect in this context.  We're talking about boot scripts here,
>> not interactive user shells.  In boot scripts, on every operating system
>> I've ever used, the shell being used is either POSIX sh or Bourne sh.
>> Everyone who writes boot scripts knows this.  Except, apparently, you.
> Not everyone who aren't distro slaves.
> https://github.com/OpenRC/openrc/commit/d64c9d205083ca82823f9f5ff178a5581f6c8b2a
> A group of "popular" or historical distros don't define how a Linux
> system should be built.

Arch Linux has used bash as the default system /bin/sh for as long as I
know of, including since before the switch from sysvinit to systemd.
(Although I'm by no means the only person to replace it with a symlink
to dash.)

That being said, it seems like a rather odd place to configure and use a
heavyweight shell merely to allow third parties to include
downstream-specific bashisms. I think there is a great deal of wisdom in
the fact that the referenced issue (
https://github.com/OpenRC/openrc/issues/288 ) is not accepted (it is
still under discussion).

The commit itself has nothing to do with bash, and is just as useful for
changing openrc to use, for example, a statically compiled POSIX sh
shell that is less likely to break, while /bin/sh is a less
system-critical component -- or even a symlink to the heavyweight bash
that you don't want slowing down your boot process.

Eli Schwartz
Arch Linux Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]