Re: bash package removing /bin/sh on upgrade
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 09:44:25AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 12:30:04PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Just having /bin/sh included in the .deb is Good Enough -- diversions
> > > work as designed.
> > Good Enough is not good enough (TM).
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 11:55:54PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> *shrug* Name a case where it fails.
You don't remember the problems when libreadline broke?
Or, to address your implicit question rather than your explicit question:
Bash is an order of magnitude more complex than what's needed for
/bin/sh -- this results in efficiency problems and results in a number
of potential reliability problems.