[CentOS] Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts

[Scott Robbins]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:02:56AM -0400, mark wrote:
> On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete Geenhuizen wrote:
> >
> >On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote:
> >>I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there
> >>been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos
> >>for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts?
> >>
> >>Are there other people who have experience in this and can
> >>provide interesting guidance?
> >>
> >Why go to that extreme if you tell a script on line 1 which shell to run it
> >will do so.
> >#!/bin/dash
> >or what ever shell you want it to run in.  I always do that to make sure that
> >the script runs as expected, if you leave it out the script will run in
> >whatever environment it currently is in.
> >
> 
> I'm confused here, too, and this has been bugging me for some time:
> why sh, when almost 20 years ago, at places I've worked, production
> shell scripts went from sh to ksh. It was only after I got into the
> CentOS world in '09 that I saw all the sh scripts again.

Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular
Unix, using ksh by default?


-- 
Scott Robbins
PGP keyID EB3467D6
( 1B48 077D 66F6 9DB0 FDC2 A409 FA54 EB34 67D6 )
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys EB3467D6