Re: Switching /bin/sh to dash without dash essential
Philipp Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On 2009-07-25, Goswin von Brederlow <email@example.com> wrote:
>> The existing dash package uses dpkg-divert, which is unsuitable on a
>> larger scale (larger than the one dash package). And to have bash
>> removable dash has to force itself as /bin/sh. So there goes even that
>> little choice.
>> What alternative do you speak off where the user will have a choice of
>> what is /bin/sh?
> I don't see us supporting anything else than dash and bash for /bin/sh
> for squeeze. So the current solution is acceptable. You can try to
> prove me wrong, of course. But someone would need to collect the
> falling out pieces when /bin/sh is switched to something they want
> to see supported (and commit to that).
But can you see that some other option would be possible in the
future? That someone might want to try something else as /bin/sh and
start fixing the bugs that causes?
I do feel that that is a possibility and we should not go from being
locked into bash being essential and /bin/sh to being locked into dash
being essential and /bin/sh. That is what it is all about.
> zsh is certainly not suitable for /bin/sh, sorry.
> Kind regards,
> Philipp Kern
> PS: I do use zsh as user shell, though and would like to thank for his
> work on that. ;-)
Never said it would. Doubt it will be in the near future. Far more
likely would be posh or busybox. But you never know.