On Jun 28, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon 28 Jun 2010 09:13 -0500, Victor Lowther wrote:
On Jun 28, 2010, at 8:59 AM, Loui Chang <louipc.ist@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon 28 Jun 2010 08:04 -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Victor Lowther <victor.lowther@gmail.com> wrote:
Questions, comments, flames, etc. welcome.
why go this way instead of the other? (clarification why go deeper into bash instead of trying to posix-ify the scripts)
Because we are never going to eliminate arrays from rc.conf.
Well, it may still be beneficial to some. The scripts could be used with a different style rc.conf in other environments.
Then it will not be Arch.
Depends on what you define as Arch. I've heard that Arch is what you make of it. Hehe. I don't know if you could disqualify it from a difference of one file.
For me, part of it is that bash is used pretty ubiquitously as the configuration and scripting language of choice. Changing that to posix sh in one of the main config files would be a big shift.