Re: /bin/sh (was Re: jessie release goals)
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 08:44:30PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 08:52:29PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Being able to choose between two entirely different desktop
> > environments, with different user experiences, is a good thing.
> > Being able to choose between two /bin/sh shells or two /sbin/init
> > implementations is not.
>
> The shell I can agree with. It is required to provide a POSIX shell,
> so as long as it is fully functional and performs well, just
> picking one and sticking with it is absolutely fine.
You are disagreeing with yourself, kind of.
If there is only exactly one system shell and everything is tuned to
work with only that one system shell then the system will no be for "a
POSIX shell" but for THAT shell. The history with bash as /bin/sh has
proven that.
The only realistic way to keep scripts compatible with "a POSIX shell"
is to have multiple shells that have POSIX as common base. So be
truthfull and say you are fine with picking XYZ as system shell and
have everything rely on sh being XYZ.
I also disagree with the assumption that being able to choose a system
shell is a bad thing. I actualy find it kind of important. By picking
dash as /bin/sh (and it isn't going to go back to bash, right?) you
are forcing dash to be installed. Also bash practically has to be
installed simply because dash as interactive shell for users sucks.
For a Debian derivativ aimed at some embedded platform it might be far
better to simply have one shell that works for both /bin/sh and
interactive user shells. This would be greatly simplified by having
more than one choice for the system shell in Debian. Support for other
shells would be better tested and easier to maintain over time.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: