Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!newshost.telstra.net!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: <DoLMFH.6Dp@twwells.com> References: <4ih5qb$lae@blackice.winternet.com> <4ik5p6$qm6@helena.mt.net> <DoJrqo.6F9@twwells.com> <4ipn36$3aq@adv.iaehv.nl> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 03:45:17 GMT Lines: 11 In article <4ipn36$3aq@adv.iaehv.nl>, Arjan de Vet <devet@adv.IAEhv.nl> wrote: : Smaller? When I compile bash with config.h.mini, statically linked and : stripped, and compare it with the statically linked and stripped /bin/sh I : get (on 2.0.5): : : -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 290816 Mar 20 20:35 bash : -r-xr-xr-x 1 bin bin 299008 Jun 10 1995 sh Yeah, smaller. I use the full-blown version for my shell. If one is going to all the trouble of using bash, one might as well get all the benefits....