Before we get started up into a big shell war, let me just make the
decision quickly. We can argue the merits of which shell is best later.
ksh won't be our /bin/sh. It's not going to be on Intel, and I've used
that as rationale for lots of things. I might as well at least be
consistent. ksh will be put into the ap series, just like it is in the
Intel distribution. So you can use it, but it won't be the /bin/sh.
bash2 will no longer be known as /bin/bash. It will be moved to
/bin/bash2. It doesn't work very well right now, so I'll just move it out
of the way. If anyone wants to use bash2 as their shell, they can just
chsh.
bash1 will no longer be known as /bin/bash1. It will be moved to
/bin/bash. That makes bash-1.14.7 our /bin/sh. Since it works just fine
for all our scripts, I'll place it in as the default shell. This is not
completely consistent with the Intel distribution, but is closer than
using ksh.
For people (like me) that still want to use ksh as /bin/sh, it's only one
symlink to make. Does everyone agree that this would be the wisest course
of action?
--
Chris Lumens - chris@slackware.com - KG6CIH
@n=(-42,-85,-83,-19,65,2,-10,-10,-15,-3,2,-10,73,-4,8,-4,2,79,8,17,15,7,14,2);
print map{chr(-$n[$i++]+ord)} sort(split(//,'place random string here')),"\n";
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri May 09 2003 - 10:00:02 PDT