From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 19 06:36:47 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194531065674 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:36:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B163D8FC1A for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:36:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 22977 invoked by uid 399); 19 Jun 2010 06:36:45 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO foreign.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 19 Jun 2010 06:36:45 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4C1C657C.8030606@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 23:36:44 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100330 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jilles Tjoelker References: <201006152158.o5FLwerZ005440@svn.freebsd.org> <86ljafwypm.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20100617023441.008cd737@dev.lan.Awfulhak.org> <20100617100315.GA37522@nagual.pp.ru> <4C1A7953.4080201@FreeBSD.org> <20100617215513.GA49512@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <20100617215513.GA49512@stack.nl> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Andrey Chernov , svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG, Brian Somers , svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav Subject: Re: svn commit: r209221 - head/bin/sh X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 06:36:47 -0000 On 06/17/10 14:55, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:36:51PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 06/17/10 03:03, Andrey Chernov wrote: >>>>> Jilles Tjoelker writes: >>>>>> Log: >>>>>> sh: Add filename completion. > >> FWIW, what I actually do is set the shell for both root and my >> unprivileged user to sh, compile bash static, and put a copy of the >> static shell in /root. Then my .profile tests for the existence of >> bash and execs it if available. > > Hmm, I see no problems with setting the shell of my unprivileged user to > something dynamically linked in /usr/local/bin. I use the same profile/bashrc/etc. for my local users, root, remote users, etc. Starting with sh and only exec'ing bash if it's viable has solved the occasional problem of something going screwy that prevents bash from running (and thereby preventing me from logging in remotely). It also helps when I'm in single user mode. > Yes, many other shells complete command names at appropriate places in > the line. However, at this time, it doesn't really fit in my idea of > what sh(1) should be. If I'm understanding the other comments and various other feedback correctly, at this point I think it would be worthwhile for you to post your plans to -arch and let people comment before proceeding with more changes. > Listing all possible command names is a fair bit > of functionality not present yet (sh only caches command pathnames that > have been used, it does not readdir all of $PATH like tcsh does). This is a perfect example of why I'm concerned about adding incompletely implemented features of an interactive shell to our sh. I'd prefer that there be a separation, but if you do post your plans to -arch I'd like to hear what others have to say as well. >> I've been very supportive of Jilles work up to this point, and I think >> he's done a great job of making our sh functional and compliant as a >> scripting shell. However in my mind adding completion (and his suggested >> inclusion of the kill builtin) tips the balance from "good system shell" >> to more of an interactive shell, and that makes me wonder if this is the >> right direction to go in. If we want a good interactive bourne-based >> shell in the base I'd rather have the discussion about which one to >> import, rather than trying to have our sh catch up with the last 15 >> years of development in this area. -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/