On 12 June 2017 at 19:21, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote:
> Richard Melville wrote:
>
>> On 11 June 2017 at 17:06, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]
>>
>
> $() is specific to bash. We try to keep the boot scripts Bourne Shell
>> compatible. I agree that $() is generally preferable, but not here.
>>
>>
>> Bruce, thanks for your answer. I wasn't going to reply as it seems a
>> little like nit-picking, but, as {,B}LFS is primarily an educational
>> resource, I felt that your statement needed correcting, for the benefit of
>> newcomers. They would be led to believe that they could not use $() for
>> any shell other than bash, but $() isn't a construct that's "specific to
>> bash". AFAIK all modern shells can use that command substitution
>> construct. Indeed, bash borrowed the construct from the Korn shell is the
>> first place. I can understand your desire for backwards compatibility,
>> but "Bourne Shell compatible" seems to me to be taking things a little too
>> far. Besides, the $() construct is Posix compatible.
>>
>
> OK, my mistake. I didn't test it. In dash 'echo $(ls)' does work.
>
> Learned something today.
>
> There are 38 instances of using `command` in the boot scripts. I do not
> know if it is worthwhile changing them or not. The scripts have been
> working pretty well since LFS 7.0 in 2011.
I'm sure that you have much better things that you could be doing. To be
honest, I don't know how you get through the work load that you do. That's
one reason why I didn't want to bother you with this issue. {,B}LFS is a
truly amazing resource. Thanks for all your (and the other editors') hard
work - it's much appreciated.
Richard
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
