Re: Several reason a minimal POSIX /bin/bash is a bad idea
On Fri, 31 Jul 1998 08:19:01 -0400 Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On 30 Jul 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I am disturbed by the several suggestions about making /bin/sh
> > a small, minimalist shell that offers just bare bones POSIX
> > environments and eschews some common shell practices for Linux (where
> > full featuresd shells have served as /bin/sh for the most part).
> >
> I have been having the same feelings, and since you expressed them so well
> I have little to say in addition.
>
> My one point is: As a user I depend on bash-history (the up arrow) and
> several other features of Bash, and would be more than a bit disapointed
> if the "default" shell was set to Ash.
Huh? Nobody said to put /bin/sh as your login-shell into /etc/passwd.
The idea was to have a small, clean (hence fast) POSIX-shell for
shell-scripts.
> > Be liberal in what you accept, be very strict in what you
> > output. Our scripts that say /bin/sh should not have bashisms. Our
> > default /bin/sh should accept them.
This is convincing.
Is there a posix-sh-lint around?
David
--
David Frey (B98D36A9) = 51F35923114FC864 7D05FF173C61EFDE
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: