Nathan Coulson wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Simon Geard <delga...@ihug.co.nz> 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 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
