Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!stanford.edu!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!kas!rhealey
From: rhealey@kas.helios.mn.org (Rob Healey)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: SVR4 /bin/sh BUG
Message-ID: <223@kas.helios.mn.org>
Date: 16 Jun 91 15:17:02 GMT
References: <1991Jun05.054111.27541@digibd.com> <377@audfax.audiofax.com> <109310@becker.UUCP>
Organization: Rob's home system, Hopkins, MN
Lines: 28

>||I'm also wondering why anyone was messing around with the shell code in
>||the first place - I mean, if sh is no longer stable, one might as well bite
>||the bullet and use ksh for the default root shell.
>|Amen.  There's no reason to ship *three* stupid shells.  ksh should have
>|been installed as /bin/sh and that's it.
>	Agreed - so how about it Amiga unix guys,
>	we all know it works; will you do this for
>	the 2.0 release?
>
	Except that LOT'S of old shell scripts would break with ksh's
	interpretation of them. There are some NASTY subtle differences
	in the way Bourne and Korn do their work. And as pointed out
	in some other articles, ksh botches up too if the right conditions
	exist.

	You DO need 3 shells to keep EVERYONE happy and to remain a REAL
	R4 rather than a gee wiz rabid variant. Make ksh your default
	shell on ALL accounts for a while and see what happens, I think
	you'll find the results educational and enlightening. The sysadm
	scripts should be especially enlightening under ksh rather than sh...

	I hate backward compatability as much as the next guy, it kills
	innovation, but in this case I think it's premature to chuck sh and
	csh.

		My $0.000000002, adjusting for inflation and recession...

		-Rob