| |||||||||||||
A tale of two shells: bash or dashA tale of two shells: bash or dashPosted Aug 6, 2009 9:04 UTC (Thu) by fb (subscriber, #53265)Parent article: A tale of two shells: bash or dash
I changed /bin/sh to dash when it was still called "ash". At once it reduced my booting time by more than a third of what it was.
That was probably 5(?) years ago, and the "trick" was then already well known to people reading debian-user. It became even more popular after Nokia did it as well in their first N700 tablet.
I think it bears testimony to Ubuntu's commitment to improving the user experience that they did this change. The fact that so far, AFAIK, they were the only dist that did it, shows IMO the lack of actual focus on desktop usability by most Linux distributions.
(Log in to post comments)
A tale of two shells: bash or dash Posted Aug 6, 2009 10:00 UTC (Thu) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link]
Do you remember early Minix, when the standard /bin/sh shell was lean and fast, but with ash available as a more comfortable but bloated alternative for interactive use?
A tale of two shells: bash or dash Posted Dec 10, 2009 16:51 UTC (Thu) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]
(waking up: which year it is, huh? :)
As already mentioned, having script-oriented shell for interactive use is a crime, and a silly one: one can have stripped-down $whatever (e.g. bash or dash) *without* readline support and half the other things as /bin/sh -- but enjoy proper zsh as an interactive chair.
Just in case, ALT Linux has sh and bash different since 2002.
|
|||||||||||||