[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ash vs. bash

On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 10:04:10PM -0500, Steve Greenland wrote:
 >Did you even read what I wrote? Did you assume that I hadn't read
 >*any* of the reasons for changing /bin/sh? Let me try again in short
 >that rely on it, quite correctly, as /bin/bash (NOT /bin/sh). Bash
 >has long been a required package, and therefore there is no need for
 >packages that use it to declare a "Depends:". And I don't see any
 >significant benefit in *removing* bash.

If you had read all of my 3 postings (now 4 :-) you would have learned that
my point was simply to link /bin/sh to /bin/ash and _NOT_ to *remove* bash,
at all. If by doing so it would turn out that bash is no longer strictly
required that is a different matter.


Carlo Strozzi       PGP Public Key fingerprint :
ED 4A 7A 6C 88 66 1B 34  06 14 FC 2E C7 EA F2 EE

Against software patents:
http://www.freepatents.org , http://no-patents.prosa.it

Reply to: