On Feb 6, 2008 11:23 AM, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Shawn Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 6, 2008 11:08 AM, Joerg Schilling > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > "Shawn Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ultimately, /sbin/sh is an unacceptable shell in a modern environment > > > > for a variety of reasons. > > > > > > > > It isn't even POSIX compliant, and the base system shell should be. > > > > > > POSIX does not deal with path names and thus does not require that > > > /bin/sh is POSIX compliant. > > > > What do path names have to do with the shell command language? > > Please try to understand how POSIX works.... > > POSIX requires a POSIX compliant shell to be available if ou type "sh" > after you typed: "PATH=`getconf PATH`" > > POSIX does _not_ deal with PATH names and thus does not say anything about > /bin/sh.
I know that. You were assuming that I cared that POSIX said whether /bin/sh should be a POSIX shell. I don't. All I care about is that the default shell used by root, etc. is: 1) *NOT* POSIX compliant 2) Buggy 3) Provides a poor user experience 4) Lacks proper internationalization support 5) Reflects poorly on Solaris 6) Hasn't been actively maintained 7) Continues to cause issues for users and developers when dealing with multiple systems ...I could think of others, but the point is that there are better options available. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
