Subject: Re: Packages for NetBSD
To: Peter Seebach <email@example.com>
From: Theodore S. Kapela <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/09/1995 13:36:43
On Mon, 09 Jan 1995 07:43:14 PST Peter Seebach wrote:
>Let me just cast my vote for including either bash or ksh as one of the
>standard shells; they both have features which csh and derivatives lack,
>and provide lots of enhancements. csh is buggy, and will remain buggy
Let me cast my vote for an end to this discussion.
Everyone has a favorite shell. Everyone wants that favorite shell
bundled with the core OS, and I'm sure arguments can be made for them
all to be included. This does NOT mean that they *should* be included.
/bin/sh and /bin/csh are more than adequate to work with a BSD system.
If a particular shell provides features you like, build it on your system
or find someone to do it for you. Don't force it upon everyone else.
That is one of the fundamental principals of BSD - being able to add to
and customize the OS to your preferences, sometimes replacing even
If every popular "package" were to be bundled with the OS, the distribution
would approach 1 gigabyte (and continue to grow beyond). Mail user agents,
news readers, shells, utilities, news servers, editors, etc. . . all
have overwhelming favorites. IMO, this does not mean they should be
part of the OS distribution, *especially* when the OS is freely available
and development & support of that OS is all volunteer work.
Of course, these are just my opinions, and everyone has the right to