Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 10:58:31 +0100 From: Alex Zbyslaw <xfb52@dial.pipex.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why csh on Root? Message-ID: <45389DC7.70208@dial.pipex.com> In-Reply-To: <20061020013833.35ae8f1b@loki.starkstrom.lan> References: <200610191303.k9JD322j081114@dc.cis.okstate.edu> <20061020013833.35ae8f1b@loki.starkstrom.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joerg Pernfuss wrote: >/bin/sh is actually an ash. Minimal POSIX sh with a few additions that >don't help it anyway near a friendly shell for interactive use. > > With "set -o emacs" or "set -o vi", and the existence of job control, sh is a perfectly adequate *root* shell, IMHO - though I'm a csh person myself. If you do a lot of maintenance in multi-user mode then you can set yourself up another id 0 account with a different name, and use any shell you like, and even make it's home directory somewhere other that /root. If you have multiple individuals needing superuser accounts each can have their own separate superuser account, personal setup preferences etc. and you get a limited amount of accountability, too. --Alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45389DC7.70208>