On Sun, Jul 26 2009, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> So the deconf thing is purely a temporary thing and goes away. There >> won't be a choice left. Users will just get /bin/sh pointing to dash >> period. > No, /bin/sh is shipped to guarantee a symlink. I take this to mean that installaations with /bin/sh -> /bin/bash will not be affected? That is good, if true. >> If admins dpkg-divert /bin/sh and use another shell they will be >> totaly left out in the cold with fixing any problems. > That's not new. Actually, this is a bit of a regression: Today, if I have bash as the default shell, and there is a problem, I can get help. I can also get help if dash is /bin/sh. So, in effect, there are two shells which are deemed proper candidates for /bin/sh; and reducing the set membership would be a regression. >> You say you give admins a choice to divert /bin/sh to whatever (posix) >> shell they like. But you only give them a choice of adding yet another >> shell. Not a choice of replacing dash. Only a choice of adding even >> more. After diverting /bin/sh instead of having one useless shell we >> now have 2 useless shells on the system. At least until bash becomes >> non essential. > > You could actually say the same about many other, even essential, > tools; so I don't see it as a problem. It is a period of transition. I think we strongly resist any additions to the Essential set; and only add things when there is no other option; so current membership in the set is not the issue. Adding to it is, and that is what makes it different. manoj -- You taught me language, and my profit on't is, I know how to curse. Caliban Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org