Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.bhp.com.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news.gtn.com!knobel.gun.de!usenet From: andreas@knobel.gun.de (Andreas Klemm) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Is replacing /bin/sh with bash recommended? Date: 13 Apr 1996 11:54:19 GMT Lines: 70 Message-ID: <4ko4lb$1qg@knobel.gun.de> References: <4ih5qb$lae@blackice.winternet.com> <4ik5p6$qm6@helena.mt.net> <DoJrqo.6F9@twwells.com> <4j0sto$scs@calypso.bns.com.au> <4j4fmh$5e8@uriah.heep.sax.de> <4j8ops$pfo@calypso.bns.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: knobel.gun.de X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.5 In article <4j8ops$pfo@calypso.bns.com.au>, mike@calypso.bns.com.au (Michael Talbot-Wilson) writes: >j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) writes: > >>mike@calypso.bns.com.au (Michael Talbot-Wilson) writes: > >>> The third is to compile GNU fileutils with >>> the color patch for ls. It's a pity this is not all done for us >>> in the distribution. > >>There would be far too many people disagreeing with you in this point. > >What point? Whether it should be available in the installation, or >whether they should use it? Whether you actually get colour or not >depends on your shell startup files. Each user can control what >he gets. Ok, this might be true so far... >>For most of us, colorized ls's are useless toys. Those who like it >>can grab two of them out of the ports collection (the Linux one, and >>yet another one). > >Who are we, that for most of us this is true? An ever-diminishing >band of hair-shirted purists, rejoicing in our rejection of >ease-of-use features, deriving our self-esteem from our exclusiveness, >preciousness, intellectual hypertrophy, and rarity? What kick do you >get out of this, Joerg? Well, don't get so deep emotional. The reason for me to switch to FreeBSD is stability. I want a Operating system, where not tons of long and good running programs are replaced mainly for the reason "but it's so cool to have it colored".... For those of you, who want a nicer ls, you have the opportunity to make or to use a port of your choice. I hope you know the term "ports collection" and the idea behind. There is absolutely no reason, to replace the original and working BSD 4.4 Lite version of ls with something else... >Try it. Acquire the capacity to judge whether or not it is a >useless toy. Describing it as a toy is a synonym for "well ok it has many nice features, but do I need them ..., couldn't it be enough, to let the user decide, which one to use, have I really to replace the original BSD-4.4 source code only for those features". Color is only a matter of taste. FreeBSD is an complete OS with well working basic stuff, there is a ports collection for the fun stuff, but I'm also the opinion, not to replace the OS stuff with the fun stuff ... Then I think you would make another Linux version but based on a FreeBSD kernel this time ;-)) Come on, cool down now, If you like to get colored ls, then grab it from source and that's it ... This is not a deep important problem. Isn't it ?! Instead of whining around one could use the time much better, by "doing" something ... well is there a "colored ls port" in the ports collection or not ... I only know, that there is a color xterm ... So hurry up man and do something productive, ok ?! -- andreas@knobel.gun.de /\/\___ Wiechers & Partner Datentechnik GmbH Andreas Klemm ___/\/\/ $$ Support Unix - aklemm@wup.de $$ pgp p-key http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html >>> powered by <<< ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/Printing/aps-491.tgz >>> FreeBSD <<<