Am Dienstag 23 März 2010 schrieb Guido Berhoerster:
* Michael Matz
[2010-03-23 14:49]: I repeatedly hear this claim, seldom to be followed up by credible numbers. And of course: when does it actually matter, even if some other shell was faster? (I already can feel the answer being "but booting will be so much faster then", which is wrong).
Well the "claim" acutally comes from the bash maintaines, read bash(1) BUGS. One example is startup time, try libmicro's system benchmark /usr/lib/libMicro/bin/system -E -C 200 -L -S -W -N "system" -I 1000000 with /bin/sh as a link to ksh or dash and empty .profile/ENV. dash is 2,5 times and ksh93 is still 1,5 times faster. I have anecdotal evidence that pattern matching while processing textfiles is significantly slower in bash compared to ksh93/dash.
Well, being 2.5 times slower doesn't really answer "when does it matter?". I mean how often do you need the performance of 'system' to be as high as possible when usually the thing that sh executes takes a million more time? (honest question and one you need to have prepared). I'm not so afraid of /bin/sh pointing to dash in the running system, what I'm mostly afraid of is switching to dash in our build system - most debian bugs are about packages breaking / changing behaviour with dash. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org