[ale] compiled system calls versus shell scripts

[esoteric at 3times25.net (Geoffrey)]

Bjorn Dittmer-Roche wrote:

> I'm not comparing make to a custom built script, but rather to a c program
> (which I thought was what we were talking about, but perhaps I missed
> something).

Actually there were various discussions going on.  My points are:

Writing C code that uses system() to spawn shells is no gain, and 
actually more costly then just running the shells themselves.

I agree it would be a hell of a piece of C code that would properly deal 
with the various start up processes and their associated dependencies.

Finally, I don't see the gain of using 'make' over just running various 
shells within background processes.  Either way, you must determine the 
dependencies, regardless of how complex they are.

pseudo code for example:

start eth0

start samba &
sambapid=$!

start nfs &
nfspid=$!

(wait $sambapid ; mount /win95) &

(wait $nfspid; mount /nfsshare) &

-- 
Until later, Geoffrey	esoteric at 3times25.net

Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft