Rainer Weikusat <[email protected]> writes: [/bin/dash -> /bin/sh]
>>> There is no question here. *If* the script in question uses dash >>> spuriously, ie, it doesn't use features specific to dash but is actually >>> a Bourne shell script, replacing /bin/dash with /bin/sh should be >>> fine. If not, stuff is going to break sooner or later, either because >>> /bin/sh isn't really dash (eg, someone might use bash for that) or >>> because of difference between the busybox and Debian (d)ash forks. >> >> There shouldn't be any "feature specific to dash", by >> construction. > > There are, "by construction". Eg, dash supports local, the POSIX /bin/sh > doesn't. A more serious one (which has once bitten me badly): dash supports chdir as undocumented alias for cd (at least up to Wheezy) [rw@doppelsaurus]/tmp#dash -c 'chdir / && pwd' / [rw@doppelsaurus]/tmp#bash -c 'chdir / && pwd' bash: chdir: command not found And then, the busybox (d)ash and the Deban dash are still completely independent codebases _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
