From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16847 invoked by alias); 23 Feb 2017 23:33:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 16794 invoked by uid 89); 23 Feb 2017 23:33:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=deference, H*M:google, research X-HELO: mail-oi0-f68.google.com Received: from mail-oi0-f68.google.com (HELO mail-oi0-f68.google.com) (209.85.218.68) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 23:33:00 +0000 Received: by mail-oi0-f68.google.com with SMTP id z13so465675oig.2 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:33:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:to:references:subject :user-agent; bh=nUg0U8ZojqB/yI6gh0ILf8P+PsSriHHNmZuoeYthwHc=; b=RsSDpuEfhLJyc3CTX5DhoBWOG7N7OQo5sHULuLC2kium33R693fhKJk2+CF08LOlZE EsB5APZajzVAiTuFTJQ4n92tfsmFJoRVb8OLn+YSy4PWlUdOMUpekB/ZgBBLcn5IePFx qYooiF5Y2FgVq83ItDj3Awe5XNp4jiyiaNfYRERqs+EL11ZoxoQm9JV/vd7zTr/3Blw2 PCrqsllIZ2v5f/OLnpmEPZZ+cfl7yo1WGLX729WGhIvP8EGQzex2zfudCYLkSF3lKDvW oiFbAhiVK7+OqEf4DvA2nNw5lpvSIu9hehIU8AsHqzWE0+j7WFc5CnbAcG97otGYedIg KvPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39llvKaReC+QmYI+7kyQEM/zd9wP2K5tJ79Tq7tHMpAFnKvV4QVGCF8Ti9dCG1rI2g== X-Received: by 10.202.197.150 with SMTP id v144mr3776886oif.125.1487892779007; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:32:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from uUZ ([2605:6000:9fc0:56:811:343f:f904:d318]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 18sm2158902otj.14.2017.02.23.15.32.58 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 15:32:58 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <58af712a.920e9d0a.9e06e.c734@mx.google.com> Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 23:33:00 -0000 From: Steven Penny X-Google-Original-From: Steven Penny To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <1225366877.20170224005008@yandex.ru> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: dash-0.5.9.1-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8; format=flowed User-Agent: Tryst/2.0.1 (github.com/svnpenn/tryst) X-SW-Source: 2017-02/txt/msg00303.txt.bz2 On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 00:50:08, Andrey Repin wrote: > In fact, you should use specific shell name, if you want specific behavior. That is not at issue here. Both before and after this proposed change, I can use #!/bin/dash to explicitly call Dash and #!/bin/bash to explicitly call Bash. What _is_ at issue here is what is called with #!/bin/sh for _all_ users, not just myself or those whom have run your homebrewed script. In that regard, since we are giving deference to Debian by using their shell, I say we continue that pattern and use Dash as /bin/sh. > The big question remains, where this speed boost coming from? > Is this a startup time? Or some internal slowness? > Because in latter case, given your STC, this is a bash issue and should be > reported upstream. Dash is faster than Bash. This is not a question, it is a fact. It is not a _bug_ any more than a Ducati being faster than an 18-wheeler is a bug. Dash by design has less features than Bash _so_ that it can be faster than Dash. It would suit you well to do some research of your own on this topic before posting further. Cheers -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple