Re: [PATCH i-g-t v2] tests: Clean up shell scripts

[Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>]

On ti, 2017-02-07 at 15:32 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Tue, 07 Feb 2017, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On ma, 2017-02-06 at 17:40 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 03:25:27PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 06 Feb 2017, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Convert all scripts to use /bin/sh shebang and fix all shellcheck
> > > > > reported problems.
> > > > 
> > > > Pro-tip, this is the place reserved in commit messages for describing
> > > > *why* you think the change is needed or for the better. ;)
> > > 
> > > And this reply here seems to be the place where I'm asking why we don't
> > > switch to C if we go through all this effort. I don't really see what sh
> > > over bash buys us (and you can pretty much expect me to re-add bashism the
> > > next time around I touch these ...).
> > 
> > Oh, totally forgot due to writing the huge RFC e-mail about it. One
> > could amend the commit message with "to able to run on non-bash
> > shells.", if it wasn't yet merged.
> 
> I learned this from the kids: Why?

We can branch the dialog here, I have the ready answers ;)

a) So you can avoid compiling bash. So you can build faster. Because
faster is better.

b) Also because you can avoid including bash in initrd. Because it
results in a smaller image with less dependencies. Because smaller _is_
better. Because it is faster to load over UEFI PXE. Because faster
better.

Did I mention faster is better?

Regards, Joonas
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx