Martin Weber wrote:

>>A more specific question is... which is the reason of having two
>>bourne shells, ksh and sh?
> 
> One for daily use in scripts, one for daily use in your terminals ?
> I like it :)

Pdksh ought to be usable as a general /bin/sh replacement; I remember 
OtherBSD using, or having used it as such years ago (don't know if they 
still do, I'm not up to date.)

OTOH, unless there's a big stream of bugs waiting for /bin/sh to be 
addressed, the effort of removing it is probably rather cosmetic and not 
worth the effort.

> (btw, /bin/sh is about half the size of /bin/ksh ...)

text    data    bss     dec     hex     filename
344032  12288   17120   373440  5b2c0   /bin/sh
323552  4096    23364   351012  55b24   /bin/ksh

mkb  23611 14.1  1.3 444 300 p0 S    10:09PM 0:00.97 sh
mkb  23595  4.6  1.3 432 300 p0 Ss   10:09PM 0:03.25 -ksh

they look pretty much the same size to me (on 1.5.1/vax, at least).

-- 
Matthias Buelow