Re: POSIX shell; bash ash pdksh & /bin/sh
Hi,
>>"Marcus" == Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:
Marcus> On Tue, Aug 04, 1998 at 12:22:59PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>
>> Oh, for gods sake. Stop mixing the bit about /bin/sh beinng
>> any POSIX shell with bash being essential. THEY ARE NOT RELATED.
Marcus> Interesting. For me the non-essentiality of bash is a logical
Marcus> consequence of moving the focus from bash to any posix
Marcus> conform shell.
Then you are indeed missing on the fact that people have been
using bash in packages and private scripts since bash has indeed been
named essential.
Marcus> You still miss my point: I think that Debian should at some
Marcus> point in the future not grant bash, but any posix shell as
Marcus> existant on the system, as /bin/sh.
Nothing to do with Bash being essential. Nothing. This point
has been agreed to. Over and over and over agin. Guy is already
committed to changing /bin/sh to be managed by /etc/alternatives. Can
we get over this now? Who is disagreeing? Where is the argument?
Marcus> Every other shell would be installed either by request of the
Marcus> sys admin or to satisfy package dependencies. (I already
Marcus> stated that bash should be the default posix shell installed,
Marcus> priority required).
Agreed. Bash indeeed is priority required already. Where is
the argument?
Marcus> The topics are related because bash is the only posix shell
Marcus> at the moment, and this is the only justification for it to
Marcus> be essential (in my point of view).
But not in other points of view. Bash is essential now not
becuase it is the only POSIX shell (it is not) but becuase too many
packages and private scripts depend on it being on the system. You
have offered no reason to remove bash. Just to make /bin/sh any
shell. We all agree to that. But, scripts starting with #!/bin/bash
have been guaranteed to work on Debian systems. I shall strongly
object to anything that dilutes that, and breaks peoples systems.
Marcus> Introducing a virtual package posix-shell does only make
Marcus> sense if there is an alternative.
There are. What does this have to do with bash?
Marcus> I'm talking about making a posix-shell essential, it doesn't
Marcus> have to be bash in my opinion. This is my point. Is this
Marcus> clear enough?
Nothing to do with the fact that bash is already essential,
and peole already depend on it. You are arguing at cross purposes.
>> Also, Policy applies to pre/post scripts, not user and
>> sysadmin and thord party scripts.
Marcus> So what? Bash as the default shell should be sufficient to
Marcus> grant every functionality needed.
So why remove the essential flag? What do we gain, apart from
rooting around and adding Depends bash all over?
>> What the heck does this have to do with bash being demoted
>> from being essential? Can't you keep your arguments on track?
Marcus> Manoj, you seem to be upset. No need to be, please calm down.
Marcus> Again, I said that I want to move the focus from bash to
Marcus> posix shell.
That has already been done. Why are you beating a dead horse?
People agree with you. Get done with it.
Marcus> Your freedom gives you the right to ignore me, but will not
Marcus> make you more right or wrong. If this is the only way you see
Marcus> to solve this discussion for you, you have either lost your
Marcus> arguments or there is a misunderstanding.
Oh, get off the high horse. You keep arguing for how it is
important that /bin/sh be any shell, not just bash. Fine. We all
agreed with that. Guy said he shall change bash. It is done. Get over
it. The argument is complex enough without dragging in old issues all
over. We are already convinced that /bin/sh can be any POSIX
shell. Stop feeding us arguments in favour.
Marcus> I'm a bit disappointed by your attitude, I remember you being
Marcus> more professional.
Being professional means keeping close the the issues under
debate. It means focussing the discussion. It means getting stopping
volumes after volumes of arguments on a topic where evrone agrees,
and concentrating on parts that epole do not.
manoj
--
... One sip of this will bathe the drooping spirits in delights
beyond dreams of bliss. --anonymous
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: