Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.cis.okstate.edu!newsfeed.ksu.ksu.edu!news.mid.net!sbctri.tri.sbc.com!newspump.wustl.edu!nntp.coast.net!news.sprintlink.net!helena.MT.net!nate From: nate@trout.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Is replacing /bin/sh with bash recommended? Date: 18 Mar 1996 17:16:22 GMT Organization: SRI Intl. - Montana Operations Lines: 18 Message-ID: <4ik5p6$qm6@helena.MT.net> References: <4ih5qb$lae@blackice.winternet.com> Reply-To: "Nate Williams" <nate@sneezy.sri.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: trout.sri.mt.net In article <4ih5qb$lae@blackice.winternet.com>, John D. Boggs <jdb@robigo.winternet.com> wrote: >What sort of nasties (if any) should I expect if I replace /bin/sh >with bash in FreeBSD-2.1.0? Big ones. Why do you want to replace it when you can add /bin/bash to the system just as easily? For the most part, bash buys you nice interactive features which are only helpful as a user shell, and using /bin/bash as the login shell buys you all those advantages. Nate -- nate@sneezy.sri.com | Research Engineer, SRI Intl. - Montana Operations nate@trout.sri.MT.net | Loving life in God's country, the great state of work #: (406) 449-7662 | Montana. home #: (406) 443-7063 | A fly pole and a 4x4 Chevy truck = Heaven on Earth