Santiago Vila Doncel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [ stuff snipped to get down to the core issue ]
What I want to see answered is this: How does one satisfy the need for an essential POSIX bourne shell with multiple possibilities? You, surely, *must* have at least one POSIX bourne shell marked as essential, otherwise people can totally hose their system by removing all bourne shells, and if there isn't an essential one you can't assume the presence of a POSIX bourne shell for the purpose of dependencies. So how do you propose to remove the essential tag from bash and yet still have an essential POSIX bourne shell? You say you don't want to put another POSIX bourne shell in place of bash in base and tagged as essential. So what, exactly is the plan? [ Everything else flows from this. This is essentially what Manoj asked, and also what I asked Stormcrow, but neither of you have answered it ] -- James
