Re: Bug#6316: Is /usr/bin/[ still needed?
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#6316: Is /usr/bin/[ still needed?
- From: David Frey <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Jan 1997 22:46:10 +0100
- Message-id: <m0vhMsL-000AHTC@eos>
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 04 Jan 1997 15:52:59 MST." <32CEDF4B.213E0930@micron.net>
In message <32CEDF4B.213E0930@micron.net> received on Sat, Jan 4 1997
Galen Hazelwood writes:
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > Do we have any such shells for Debian? Is it likely that anyone will
> > ever install such a shell?
> I don't know. What about csh/tcsh? I use bash pretty much
> exclusively. FSSTND states that [ and test go into /usr/bin, since
> "essentially every Bourne shell replacement there is for Linux"
> has them built in. pdksh and zsh have them built in as well.
> As long as we're not crippling anything obscure, I have no problem
> with removing /usr/bin/[ from shellutils. I hesitate only for
> reasons of tradition.
FWIW: Removing /usr/bin/[ would violate POSIX.2, so if we decide to be one
POSIX.2 compliant, we would have to put it back in.
David Frey <firstname.lastname@example.org> |Microsoft isn't the answer...it's the
Schlieren, Switzerland |``No'' is the answer.
51F35923114FC8647D05FF173C61EFDE|Use Debian GNU/Linux!
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com