On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 1:17 PM Joerg Schilling <joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > > Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > Wikipedia says that dash is a fork of NetBSD's ash, and I do see tests > > in their CVS repo. That might be worth looking into. > > > > http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/tests/bin/sh/ > > I see this is the variant from Rihard Elz, so it may make sense. > The original ash is too buggy as a reference. > > > > When ever I change something in bosh, I run the unit tests to verify that > > > I did > > > not introduce a bug. One of the unit tests is to run a configure and > > > compare > > > the results with the results frm a reference shell. > > > > > > BTW: Did you ever think about replacing dash by bosh? > > > > We use bash as the default /bin/sh, but users are free to replace it > > with whatever shell they like, so long as it is reasonably > > POSIX-compliant. Other shells are obviously less tested in Gentoo. > > Well, bosh has been tested to work as /bin/sh on Gentoo. > BTW: On Solaris, bosh is faster than dash (because Solaris has a fully working > vfork()). On Linux bosh is "only" of the same speed as dash since vfork() on > Linux does not borrow the parents address space description but copies it.
Is that also true of clone(CLONE_VM|CLONE_VFORK)? Recent versions of glibc use this to implement the posix_spawn() function.
