Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!news.gan.net.au!act.news.telstra.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!twwells!bill From: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) Subject: Re: Is replacing /bin/sh with bash recommended? Organization: None, Mt. Laurel, NJ Message-ID: <DoL1pq.Fzp@twwells.com> References: <4ih5qb$lae@blackice.winternet.com> <4ik5p6$qm6@helena.mt.net> <DoJrqo.6F9@twwells.com> <4ipdtv$d6m@helena.mt.net> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 20:17:49 GMT Lines: 29 In article <4ipdtv$d6m@helena.mt.net>, Nate Williams <nate@sneezy.sri.com> wrote: : >This is a load of shit. Since I converted to NetBSD/FreeBSD on the BTW: I forgot to note that I have now taken to liberally sprinkling obscenity in my posts, in defiance of the CDA. I encourage all to do the same. : >various machines I've used over the last two odd years, I have : >*always* replaced /bin/sh with a statically linked bash. Except : >right at the beginning, when NetBSD's /usr/src Makefiles were : >fucked up, I have had _no_ problems. None at all. : : Then you've never rebuilt FreeBSD, because the build system *requires* : the /bin/sh supplied and blows chunks if you use bash. You're quite right. So far, I've never had to do a complete rebuild of FreeBSD. Lots of kernel builds and about a dozen programs rebuilt to fix bugs/add features, but no complete rebuild. All of those have worked flawlessly. Speaking of which, I need to submit some of those.... Anyway, I'm not impressed by the notion that, within FreeBSD itself, they've come to rely on the incompatibilities of their shell....unless you're going to tell me that it blows because of errors in the implementation of bash? I'd certainly believe it, if true, but if it's the same thing that failed with NetBSD, it wasn't bash's fault.