On 01/24/2013 05:47 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Nathan Coulson wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Simon Geard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 10:50 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>>> The potential problem with using bash is compatibility with non-LFS/BLFS >>>> scripts. >>> Are non-LFS scripts compatible with ours, sourcing our functions files >>> and stuff? Because I've never seen one that was, and 3rd-party >>> bootscripts seem to be coming even less common now that systemd is >>> catching on with the distros. I've always just created my own scripts >>> from the template when necessary. >> Potentially the parts that are used by LSB compliant bootscripts. >> Otherwise if there are bootscripts using our functions, they would >> have been a derivative of LFS or BLFS. > I've committed some changes in several scripts that had bashisms. The > next render of the book should create the 20130123 version of the boot > scripts with the changes. > > I also noticed that the 'test' and '[' programs are in /usr/bin. We > need to move those to /bin in LFS (coreutils). Those are really only > useful in dash. > > -- Bruce > > >
I noticed that what you have committed are changing the echo to /bin/echo. I use printf instead of echo as I believe it is more portable and POSIX compliant. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
