On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 07:09:46PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > Perhaps because we need a POSIX compliant shell?
> There are only two reasons that a change goes into ash. It's either for > standard-compliance or optimisation. If you wish to make a version of ash which is minimally-compliant it would probably be better to rename it since the behaviour is going to diverge from the mainstream ash and that goal doesn't seem entirely compatible with what people looking for a fast shell want.