[LTP] [PATCH 1/3] tst_test.sh: Simplify tst_cmd_available()

[Petr Vorel]

Hi Joerg,

...
> > +	type $1 >/dev/null 2>&1
> I guess there was a reason, why command was used here in the first place.
> Iirc type is often a shell builtin, that can have different behavior, while
> command -v is posix and should be extremely portable.
> So maybe it is better to use "command -v" instead of type here. I hope most
> distributions have a command-command...
Well, I wrote that code, in dba1d50cb :). IMHO both are POSIX and both are shell
builtin.

I tested it on all implementations and the only difference is that both "type"
and "command -v" on dash and busybox sh returns 127 on missing command, the rest
return 1.

Kind regards,
Petr