[luism6n]

I'm not the OP, but I think the goal is to make it cross architecture. Cross platform C compiler would give you cross OS compatibility, but chip architecture would still be fixed, I think.

I.e., you can take your compiled.sh and run in an obscure processor with an obscure OS, as long as it's POSIX, it should work...

[MobiusHorizons]

I believe the goal is to defeat the compiler trust thought exercise where a malicious compiler could replicate itself when being asked to compile the compiler. Since this produces human readable code instead of assembly, the idea is it allows bootstrapping a trusted compiler, since pnut.sh and any output shell executables are directly auditable.

I suppose the trust moves to the shell executable then, but at least you could run the bootstrapping with multiple shells and expect identical output.

[laurenth]

That's the idea!

As you point out, it moves the trust from the binary to the shell executable, but the shell is already a key piece of any build process and requires a minimum level of trust. The technique of bootstrapping on multiple shells and comparing the outputs is known as Double Diverse Compiling[0] and we think POSIX shell is particularly suited for this use case since it has so many implementations from different and likely independent sources.

The age and stability of the POSIX shell standard also play in our favor. Old shell binaries should be able bootstrap Pnut, and those binaries may be less likely to be compromised as the trusting trust attack was less known at that time, akin to low-background steel[1] that was made before nuclear bombs contaminated the atmosphere and steel produced after that time.

0: https://dwheeler.com/trusting-trust/ 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel