From: Martin List-Petersen (martin_at_list-petersen.dk)
Date: Thu 26 Jun 2003 - 11:44:11 BST
Citat Herbert Poetzl <herbert_at_13thfloor.at>:
> > > > that can't be done i a shell script ?
> > >
> > > reasons for not using perl (or any other script
> > > language) for the vserver script:
> > >
> > > - sh is available on _all_ systems
> > perl too. I don't know a linux distro without perl.
> hmm, a physical host works nicely without perl,
> as a matter of fact, I would not install it ...
> but you are right, that almost any distribution
> provides some version of perl ;)
Provide :), means not that you have to install it.
> > > reasons agains using shell scripts:
> > >
> > > - overhead is high (forks, I/O, etc)
I don't totally agree. Yes, this fits for shell scripts, but it also fits for
perl scripts. I doesn't give meaning to port a script from one interpreter
language to another unless some needed features can't be done in one of them.
My argument for shell/against perl are mostly, that it would be nice to keep a
server at a minimum of software. But that's just my 0.02$.
martin at list-petersen dot dk
-- BOFH excuse #227:
Fatal error right in front of screen