On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 12:57:15PM -0600, Victor Lowther wrote: >> The introduction of additional bashisms is something I'm not sold on. > > Well, it seems that most of the concern about bashisms has to do with > the code that ends up on the initrd. Making that code strictly posix is > probably a good thing. > > There is no real benifit in having the initrd generating code be > strictly posix, IMHO. It could be written in C, python, haskell, or > INTERCAL. Good point. I admit my comment was a knee-jerk reaction from reading the first post without having read the whole patchset. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe initramfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
