On 4/9/19 10:25 AM, konsolebox wrote: > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 10:39 PM Greg Wooledge <wool...@eeg.ccf.org> 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
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
