Re: /bin/sh (was Re: jessie release goals)
Steve Langasek <vorlon <at> debian.org> writes:
> This is not a sensible goal. Choice of /bin/sh should *not* be the goal,
> the goal should be to get a good, fast, minimal, policy-compliant /bin/sh
> for *everyone*.
Sure. We just disagree which one that is.
> See also: Linux is not about choice.
Debian is not just about Linux.
Oh, sorry, I forgot, you work for Canonical (which totally explains some
of your writings in the other eMail too, which I’m not going to comment
on). Of course, for *buntu people it’s not about choice.
Now please take that attitude and go back to *buntu, where you *can*
force one “desktop environmen”, one system shell, etc. on your users.
In Debian, Developers are also users, and it can only be the
UNIVERSAL operating system when there is choice.
> Yes, the diversion hack should be superseded by a single, static symlink
> belonging to the dash package
Why dash? It’s clearly inferiour, buggy and not taken care of well.
Oh, I forgot, you work for Canonical, who apparently invested into it.
Well, newsflash: there are others who don’t. (And I’ve made it a
personal crusade to replace uses of ash as shell, so why not dash
either. Yes, this means I’m totally biased as well. I admit it
though, and this is why I fight for the freedom for the users to
choose their system shell. I don’t even care about the default,
I’d be happy were it mksh or mksh-static of course, but I don’t.
And I’ve successfully run both Debian and Kubuntu with mksh as
system shell.)
> No, it is NOT about choice. It is about providing a high quality, free
> operating system to our users. This ridiculous complexity in /bin/sh
But your users may have a more broad horizon than you, as Canonical
employee, can imagine. They may want to have more of the Open Source
ecosystem offered than you want to give them, especially to keep the
saying “if it’s not in Debian it doesn’t exist” true.
Users in Debian are NOT just desktop end users. They are also developers,
both Debian and upstream. They are also systems engineers. And lots more.
Including once-deployed embedded devices in remote locations requiring
“node” to refer to the hamradio tool (remember this discussion?).
bye,
//mirabilos
Reply to: