Re: Sysinst default root login shell

[Eric Haszlakiewicz <erh%nimenees.com@localhost>]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 03:19:33PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> You know, any person who is not a total illiterate have little problem 
> changing their shell, or the shell of the root user. There is nothing 
> that force you to keep the default.

IMO, having capable and useful defaults is a big part of a usable system.
Sure, I *can* change the shell, just like if /usr/pkg/bin wasn't in the
default .profile (or .cshrc) I *could* add it, or if we weren't using
"less" as the "more" command I *could* install it myself, or if we didn't
have a pkg_add command I *could* go build things myself, but that's time
that could be better spent doing other things.

> This whole request to change the default shell of root is really stupid, 
> for various reasons. And the arguments for doing the change are so weird 
> I can't relate to them.
> 
> Like I said, I guess I can't be bothered. I've given up. This ain't BSD 
> anymore, except for the deceptive name. And I've run out of energy 

eh?  Is "BSD", and NetBSD in particular, really defined mostly by the shell?
I kind of figured it was more things like careful thought put into the 
architecture of various systems, plus a bit of a general style for a whole
set of commands that focuses on avoid unnecessary bits.

> trying to improve the world. I'll just recommend anyone who ask me to 
> just go and install Linux instead, since it's at least coherent in its 
> brokenness.

Are you really saying csh is better?  I got the impression that your
argument so far was more along the lines that it's more "traditional",
and while that can be useful as a supporting argument, it seems a poor
reason on it's own.

eric