Martin Schaffstall wrote: > On 9/21/06, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: [snip] > > >Why doesn't apply the same argumentation to "libshell in the root > > >filesystem", too ? > > > > Because we need one shell and /sbin/sh suffices for now. > > Sounds you like being a little sadist and punish users with /sbin/sh.
It would be nice to avoid attacking people at the personal level. I agree with the opinion that /sbin/sh is a pain and we may be able to address this issue somewhere in the future but this is not the subject of this ARC case - and for now /sbin/sh is more or less sufficient to get the system up and running. After this point it is no longer really needed (except in emergencies in which case I was hoping for a /sbin/ksh93 as an alternative - but the current objections from ARC made this idea simply impossible). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
