This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Just say *no* to ash?
- To: Chris Faylor <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: Just say *no* to ash?
- From: Geoffrey Noer <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 14:00:18 -0700
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- References: <19990704002813.A6462@cygnus.com>
On Sun, Jul 04, 1999, Chris Faylor wrote:
> I've just compiled bash with --enable-minimal-config which is supposed to
> produce a /bin/sh-like version of bash. It's about 2.2 times the size of
> ash when finished.
> While I like the thought of using a small, fast shell for configures I'm
> wondering if this is ever going to buy us as much as it loses in lack of
> compatibility with a "standard". And, we seem to be constantly fixing
> bugs in ash, as well.
> Does anyone have an opinion on whether ash should go?
Hmmmm. Well, Cygwin has sped up a bit so perhaps the discrepency
isn't as noticable. When we changed to ash for configures, I think
the speed-up was well worth the additional maintenance of ash. That
may still be the case, dunno. I haven't compared them recently.
Geoffrey Noer Email: email@example.com