4 ms·
> If you want to maximize the chance that your software will compile and execute correctly on a Linux distro 5+ years from now, a good first step is making sure
by sjellis 8y ago
> If you want to maximize the chance that your software will compile and execute correctly on a Linux distro 5+ years from now, a good first step is making sure it builds and runs natively on some of the BSDs.
Like everything, this is a trade-off: what you are advocating is that people use a more or less frozen sub-set of features, and avoid improvements that are already de-facto standard.
I looked at what would happen if my employer standardised shell scripting on "sh", rather than "bash", and quickly concluded that it was a bad tradeoff for us: Bash is, has has been, the standard shell in every place that we would want to run non-trivial shell scripts: if we ran Alpine Linux containers, we could just treat those as a special case.
- toast0 8y agoUsing bash instead of sh is ok enough (some people won't agree), but what's bad is writing bash script and using #!/bin/sh