Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Pierre Labastie wrote:
On 10/10/2017 13:55, Николай Сосницкий wrote:
10.10.2017, 14:42, "Pierre Labastie" <[email protected]>:
On 10/10/2017 13:11, Николай Сосницкий wrote:
Hello everybody!
I found little mistake in LFS book (both sysvinit and systemd):
in Capter 6 section Coreutils the last command
"mv -v /usr/bin/{head,sleep,nice,test,[} /bin"
has wrong operand "[".
This mistake is not present in 7.5 and early versions and present in
7.6 and later include current stable:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/stable/LFS-BOOK-8.1-NOCHUNKS.html#ch-system-coreutils
P. S. Sorry for my english, please.
"[" is the name of an executable. It does the same thing as "test". Note
that it is not used much, since "[" is built in the sh or bash shell.
But since we move "test", we move "[".
Hello, Pierre!
I'm sorry for this. I asked in #lfs-support IRC cannel and have advice
to post in this mailing list.
Don't be sorry Nickolay: this is exactly what lfs-support is for. Asking
questions! Actually, the text in the sentence above the command you cite
may be misleading, since it mention only "head", "sleep", and "nice". It
should also mention "test" and "["... Also, I doubt "[" is useful in /bin,
since bash has it built in.
bash does include [ as an internal command, but I'm not sure if all other
shells do. However testing dash and zsh indicate that they do. I really
don't think /bin/[ is needed at all any more. We can say the same thing
about /bin/test.
I suspect the only reason for these commands any more are for really old
scripts that may hard code the path for these commands.
Maybe ash needs them. ash is used during installation/rescue of debian. I
do not think that is a good choice any more.
A little more research... busybox/ash does indeed need them. I don't
think lfs needs them, but they come for 'free' with coreutils.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
