On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Josh Hurst wrote: > On 8/8/07, Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Tim Bray wrote: >>> On Aug 7, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Chris Pickett wrote: >>> >>>> I think we have a bigger problem than /bin/ksh: Does Indiana or >>>> Opensolaris want to address the problem that Opensolaris still uses >>>> the original bourne shell as /bin/sh? Most modern Unices use either >>>> bash or ksh as /bin/sh >>> >>> This is well known to be an area fraught with religion. Having said >>> that, my impression is that a large majority of the linux community, >>> and substantially all of the OS X community, live in bash, which is / >>> bin/sh. I bet that quite a few of the younger linux & mac geeks >>> don't even know there are other shells :) Early releases of OS X >>> had tcsh and that provoked much beating of breasts and gnashing of >>> teeth until they switched to bash. -Tim >> >> Wait though. Why aren't we just applying the logic of the Nevada GNU >> project design[1]? So if I understand it correctly, /bin/sh would >> remain the Bourne Shell > > -1 > I strongly disagree. ...
Fair enough. > ... /bin/sh needs to be replaced. > > >> and /usr/gnu/bin/sh becomes a symlink to >> /bin/bash... What's wrong with that? > > It won't help makefiles, users of system() and popen()... Understood. As always, there are tradeoffs either way. We disagree on which set of tradeoffs is best. Eric > and all other > users who expect that /bin/sh is a decent shell such as ksh or bash. > > Josh _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
