On ti, 2017-02-07 at 15:32 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Tue, 07 Feb 2017, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On ma, 2017-02-06 at 17:40 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 03:25:27PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 06 Feb 2017, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Convert all scripts to use /bin/sh shebang and fix all shellcheck > > > > > reported problems. > > > > > > > > Pro-tip, this is the place reserved in commit messages for describing > > > > *why* you think the change is needed or for the better. ;) > > > > > > And this reply here seems to be the place where I'm asking why we don't > > > switch to C if we go through all this effort. I don't really see what sh > > > over bash buys us (and you can pretty much expect me to re-add bashism the > > > next time around I touch these ...). > > > > Oh, totally forgot due to writing the huge RFC e-mail about it. One > > could amend the commit message with "to able to run on non-bash > > shells.", if it wasn't yet merged. > > I learned this from the kids: Why? We can branch the dialog here, I have the ready answers ;) a) So you can avoid compiling bash. So you can build faster. Because faster is better. b) Also because you can avoid including bash in initrd. Because it results in a smaller image with less dependencies. Because smaller _is_ better. Because it is faster to load over UEFI PXE. Because faster better. Did I mention faster is better? Regards, Joonas -- Joonas Lahtinen Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
