Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID:	<19990603181016.1485.rocketmail@web135.yahoomail.com>
Date:	Thu, 3 Jun 1999 11:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com
Subject:	Re: various 'cywin1.dll' tested with PERL's 'Configure' script.
To:	cygwin users <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- Ian Zimmerman <itz AT lbin DOT com> wrote:
> Glenn Spell wrote:
-8<-
> 
> Why do we need ash anyway - what's the trouble with using just bash as
> sh?  I tried using ash several times on my Linux boot floppies to save
> space, but I always concluded it wasn't worth the trouble, bash is just
> so much better even for noninteractive use.  Instead I saved space by
> not including any executables that had a corresponding bash built-in,
> and rewriting several others as scripts.

Bash is a heavyweight and slows down processing.  Ash was included only
beginning with b19.  So, you can do as you did if you don't need the processing
speed.  Personally I prefer having the extra speed from the lighter ash package.
===
YAWIA,
Earnie Boyd <mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>

Newbies, please visit
<http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/gw32/index.html>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -