Subject: Re: "default shell" [was: Re: CVS commit: src/usr.sbin/user]
To: Pavel Cahyna <email@example.com>
From: Thor Lancelot Simon <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/06/2006 12:03:45
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 05:57:25PM +0200, Pavel Cahyna wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 12:33:39AM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > I think that's a bad idea because to anyone who _is_ used to ksh --
> > real ksh -- as a login shell, our ksh clearly doesn't cut it.
> I don't think it is a problem. I proposed (our) ksh because it is fairly
> good as interactive shell, not because it replaces the real ksh.
I think the only reason it is better as an interactive shell than our
/bin/sh is that it has command-line editing turned on by default.
As I proposed in another thread, why don't we just turn on command line
editing in our /bin/sh?
> We could rename /bin/ksh to /bin/pdksh to make clear that it is not a
> perfect ksh replacement. What do you think?
That would, unfortunately, break existing passwod files.