From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Nov 10 11:16:58 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02702 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 11:16:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gamefish.pcola.gulf.net (gamefish.pcola.gulf.net [198.69.72.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA02697 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 11:16:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from psalzman@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net) Received: from localhost (psalzman@localhost) by gamefish.pcola.gulf.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA15411; Tue, 10 Nov 1998 19:16:09 GMT (envelope-from psalzman@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 19:16:09 +0000 (GMT) From: Phillip Salzman To: Martin Cracauer cc: Yarema , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: X desktop contest? + Desktop Env In-Reply-To: <19981110151438.A15464@cons.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > I don't think that makes sense. bash2 is now the "standard" shell for > userfriendly Unix accounts (and works well, BTW). If we ship a > slightly different default shell, we'll be flooded with PRs from > people used to bash. And zsh has quite some subtle differences (IMHO, > it is much worse than bash2). Bash is far from standard. Just a lot of people use it, and some like it. sh and csh are the standards. Shipping with bash as the default shell is utterly stupid, expecially for an OS like FreeBSD. > > And I don't think the license matters that much in this case, > either. A more comfortable shell is for those people who want it and > as long as the system still runs when you remove it, a GPL software is > fine. > The license has a lot to do with it. We cannot ship with bash installed by default because we run off of the ``Berkeley Style'' license. This differs a lot from GPL, and you cannot split an OS up into two different licenses. We can, infact, offer it as a third party software enhancement. Like we do now, via the ports/packages. Maybe something at the end of the installation saying "Would you like to include a more userfriendly shell?" or of the sort. > ports//easy2use > which depends on X11, bash2, fvwm2/95, some file browser, a stupid X > editor, less, a Web browser with default to > /usr/share/doc/handbook/index.html, Mail and News reader. Just use the > most commonly used tools (see logfile from wcarchive for > pub/FreeBSD/packages). > not fvwm95, eww! ;) But something basically of the sort - but it will be rolled out and designed for FreeBSD. Something like that. -- Phillip Salzman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message