Re: Default PATH setting - reduce to something more sensible?

On 2025-01-14, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:

Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> writes:

As far as I could determine, some sort of path searching has existed
since the 6th edition of UNIX (., /bin and /usr/bin hardcoded in the
shell) and in its present form, it has existed since the 7th edition of
UNIX. Which means PATH searching was used on PDP-11 16-bit minicomputers
in the 1970s. It didn't cause performance problems back
then and will thus certainly don't cause any today.

>
There are cases where it _does_ cause performance degradation, if one or
more of the PATH elements refer to NFS filesystems, for example.

If it doesn't hurt, that "hash -r" stuff in Bash and probably other
shells has to be just developer gold plating. :)

I suspect that machines becoming faster *and* process creation becoming
more complex and heavier (e.g. attaching multiple shared libraries and
resolving symbols) has allowed us to get away with longer PATHs without
noticing.

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca