fascistic commit r084e2284c700 busybox/scripts/gen_build_files.sh

[Nils Carlson]

On Thu, 20 May 2010, Peter Tyser wrote:

<snip>
> Other than you, I haven't heard other arguing for using bashisms.
> There's been a lot of emails, maybe I'm missing some though.

I can't argue against bashisms, but neither can I argue for dashisms. If
we go posix shell compliant, then we should be posix shell compliant, but
posix shell complicance is very very restrictive so this would be a real
pain.

If as denny's noted dash fails sh compliance then it's best to ignore dash
as broken.

Best would be to go for the subset of bashism that is supported by (some)
busybox shell, so you can use busybox or bash to build. If dash supports
the same subset that would be nice.

/Nils