X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4C5C0DD8.2040906@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 07:27:52 -0600
From: Eric Blake <eblake AT redhat DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100803 Red Hat/3.1.2-1.el6 Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: dash dash?
References: <2BF01EB27B56CC478AD6E5A0A28931F20139546C AT A1DAL1SWPES19MB DOT ams DOT acs-inc DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <2BF01EB27B56CC478AD6E5A0A28931F20139546C@A1DAL1SWPES19MB.ams.acs-inc.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig664D904CC6074290A6F517DC"
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

--------------enig664D904CC6074290A6F517DC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 08/06/2010 07:21 AM, Nellis, Kenneth wrote:
> Attempting to do some housecleaning and uninstall packages
> I no longer use,  I attempted to uninstall dash, but Setup=20
> informs me that it is required by rebase. Wouldn't bash or=20
> the Bourne shell be a more appropriate choice? Sure,  dash
> is smaller than either,  but efficiency isn't critical for
> an application such as rebase.

rebaseall (which is a wrapper around rebase) _cannot_ rebase an in-use
.dll.  Dash has fewer in-use dlls than bash.  Therefore, dash is the
(much) better choice for rebase.

By the way, the Bourne shell is pretty much obsolete.  On Solaris,
/bin/sh is still the Bourne shell, but on every other system, /bin/sh
aims to be POSIX-compatible (the historic Bourne shell does not comply
with POSIX).  And for portability reasons, you are better off writing a
POSIX-compatible script that can use /bin/sh rather than requiring
/bin/bash.

I'm also entertaining the notion of following Debian's lead and
switching /bin/sh to dash, since dash is noticeably faster than bash if
your script is POSIX-conforming.  Not very seriously yet, but it's not
out of the question.

>=20
> I then ran "man dash" and found two places in the man page=20
> that use the Unicode MATHEMATICAL LEFT/RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET=20
> (U+27E8/27E9) symbols. These symbols probably don't render
> properly on most folk's systems, so IMHO are a poor choice=20
> of symbols to use in a man page. In an example, it shows:
>=20
>     lf foobar =E2=9F=A8return=E2=9F=A9

Please report bugs in the dash man page upstream to the dash development
list.

--=20
Eric Blake   eblake AT redhat DOT com    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org


--------------enig664D904CC6074290A6F517DC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg
Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJMXA3YAAoJEKeha0olJ0Nq8egH/iczy3yrw/MpIYzPtzJQzoBC
HVoiNBaApe+27Nvewa7qNZAYrPwwEvL1JFZgmmFGr5pGabKZkuKXijNtoNLfJ+kQ
rmQoV0BvGXZ60lcUsWIMW3l/rQShIX6oJLQ57Rz7OGmdnpI6qQcmSRzMPNdF/7q2
pGR7JntE8vpHc6OIecZk61oiyrjAp8bTlT6mp1TlErLbBwi4cGQlYtd/KwhAx+QG
QMyKeL7F9lvoTowb7kUmozdnriYg2JdYpnXd+4lrVja2izCcHw3fIZfPil1zjrt5
GJsxRN6SZcGdgk1T0LuKKqiMtQwCoIJJ7Su1TDU9aVSiAAJJ+wiUNjQVnc6/2yo=
=fnPe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig664D904CC6074290A6F517DC--