On 2/4/12 7:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > In other words, whether it's bash or dash or ash, the shell program is > only read in from disk once for all the bootscripts. The only other > difference is the time it takes to actually run the scripts. For our > scripts that are generally about 5-10 statements for the start routine, > any differences there would be hard to detect a timing difference. The > longest part would be the time to process /lib/lsb/init-functions for > each script, but that's quite a bit shorter than any commercial distro > that I've seen.
Yes, the difference in complexity I was referring to was not really how complex an LFS system could become, but rather between our typically sparse function libraries/scripts and that of a satisfy-everyone distro. Apparently in Ubuntu, the switch to dash as sh for the bootscripts made a noticeable difference. In any case, moving to dash as the shell for bootscripts on my system revealed a few instances of non-portable code, so that was useful. I now have scripts that work the same with dash, bash and busybox. JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
