Re: [gentoo-dev] yet another virtual question

[Stuart Herbert]

On Friday 26 March 2004 19:39, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> That's exactly the point of my questions as well, actually.  We got a
> bug report in (at least one, probably more), asking for choice in
> shells.  The complaint essentially was that the rc-script and init stuff
> uses /bin/bash explicitly, and not /bin/sh.  The thinking behind that
> report was that people may want to have some other-than-bash shell
> installed, which is what brings us to here now :)

If there are scripts that rely on #!/bin/sh being bash, then I think that'd be 
a reasonable bug.  /bin/sh on a SVR4 system is definitely less capable than 
bash.  If he's complaining about scripts that use #!/bin/bash, then I think 
he's wasting our time ;-)

(Hrm .. just noticed that /bin/bash isn't statically linked.  "Traditionally", 
if it goes in /bin or /sbin, it should be statically linked, so that it works 
with no /usr or /lib mounted.  That's why "traditional" systems also have 
shells in /usr/bin.)

Do we *have* a true /bin/sh package in Portage?  The nearest I ever saw the 
free software community come was ash.

Best regards,
Stu
-- 
Stuart Herbert                                              stuart@g.o
Gentoo Developer                                       http://www.gentoo.org/
Missed the php|cruise?             http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/cruise-2004/

GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list