>I don't know that I can argue for ksh93 versus any other shell,
>but adding /sbin/ksh93 at least gives us one modern, more feature-rich
>alternative to the bourne shell (/sbin/sh), for use as the root shell,
>in JumpStart scripts, or in single-user mode, when dealing with filesystem
>problems.
I don't think that's a strong enough reason:
- you can already use any shell as root shell; is /usr isn't
mounted /sbin/sh is used instead.
By this reasoning, we should add bash/zsh/tcsh/csh there too.
If you have a separate /usr, well, you pretty much deserve the
barebones system you get.
And I also suggest we move all ksh93 libaries to /usr/lib with
the needed exception of libcmd.
Casper
