[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: OLPC 'upstream'

Dan Williams wrote:

>>>>Does this laptop really need a full bash?  
>>>Does this laptop really need a shell?
>>Is it having initscripts?
> Not necessarily ones that require a shell to execute.  The target users
> have nearly no use for a shell (or if they need one, we haven't done our

Still, ssh-ing into a box is normally very useful, and you really want
to come up into a shell.  But I take your point.

> job).  Fedora's initscripts are a stinking pile of crap right now
> anyway.  There's some room to rethink the init process for these things,
> and maybe that means ditching the dependency on a shell _during the init
> process_.

I saw a lot of work was done mapping what happens during boot and
initscripts and where the time is going.  There's stuff like initng
(http://initng.thinktux.net/index.php/Main_Page ) so that sounds like a
great idea for Fedora too.

But ash in busybox really is negligible, sad to disallow the possibility
of simple enduser scripts tying coreutils together with, eg, wget, for
HTML screenscraping or whatever.  Still good to hear this radical
thoughtprocess is underway!


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]