From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Tue Dec 16 08:17:21 2003
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) id hBFNHLe92151;
	Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:17:21 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from dan.emsphone.com (root@dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6p2+3.4W/8.11.3) with ESMTP/inet id hBFNH7M91914
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:17:07 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com)
Received: (from dan@localhost)
	by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) id hBFNGmHe044627;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:16:48 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from dan)
From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
To: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org>
Cc: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>, arch@freebsd.org, acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Message-ID: <20031215231648.GH17799@dan.emsphone.com>
References: <20031213130351.N59162@root.org> <20031215220627.GB16497@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20031215220627.GB16497@saboteur.dek.spc.org>
X-OS: FreeBSD 5.2-BETA
X-message-flag: Outlook Error
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:16:48 -0600
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 2914
Subject: [acpi-jp 2914] Re: Power profile script
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Originator: dnelson@allantgroup.com
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+031215

In the last episode (Dec 15), Bruce M Simpson said:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2003 at 01:12:03PM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
> > I'm mostly looking for style input on the /etc/power_profile script since
> > I'm not familiar with our scripting guidelines.  Note that it's called
> > from devd (or manually by the user) and is not an rc.d boot-time thing.
> 
> One of the things green suggested to me when I was airing out the new
> trafd.sh rcNG script was the use of $(...) instead of the backtick
> operator -- apparently this has slightly different semantics but it
> does save on forking overhead.

It shouldn't have any difference wrt overhead; `` and $() end up doing
just about the same thing in src/bin/sh/parser.c; see the code starting
at parsebackq.  oldstyle is 1 when processing the `` style.  They both
fork under the same conditions.  I use the $() syntax mainly because
it's easier to nest.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com
