From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 15 11:57:01 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5267A16A421 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:57:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerard@seibercom.net) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.247]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10F8813C458 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:57:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerard@seibercom.net) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c14so454403anc.13 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:57:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.100.44.4 with SMTP id r4mr9380210anr.119.1197719820127; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:57:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.102? ( [67.189.206.211]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r28sm1158299ele.2007.12.15.03.56.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:56:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 06:57:09 -0500 From: Gerard Seibert To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Organization: Seibercom.net In-Reply-To: <20071215010359.GA13564@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> References: <20071214175906.D727.A38C9147@seibercom.net> <20071215010359.GA13564@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> X-Face: "\j?x](l|]4p?-1Bf@!wN<&p=$.}^k-HgL}cJKbQZ3r#Ar]\%U(#6}'?<3s7%(%(gxJxxcR nSNPNr*/^~StawWU9KDJ-CT0k$f#@t2^K&BS_f|?ZV/.7Q Message-Id: <20071215065435.741B.A38C9147@seibercom.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.44 [en] Subject: Re: Apparently, csh programming is considered harmful. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:57:01 -0000 > On December 14, 2007 at 08:03PM Frank Shute wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:00:14PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote: > > > > > On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote: > > > > [ snip ] > > > > > I'm happy with sh as the system shell though; it's light weight: > > > > > > $ ls -l /bin/sh > > > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 111028 Nov 30 00:10 /bin/sh ~ $ ls -l /bin/sh -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 111788 Oct 5 13:55 /bin/sh* > > > $ ls -l /bin/ksh > > > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 681584 Oct 6 12:33 /bin/ksh > > > > > > How about giving us all a laugh and posting the results for bash ;) > > > > ~ $ ls -l /usr/local/bin/bash > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 643984 Sep 12 15:51 /usr/local/bin/bash* > > > > pdksh has put on weight. Used to be ~300k in the 4.* days and bash > about 500k IIRC. On my machine bash is bigger than yours (newer version?): ~ $ bash --version bash --version GNU bash, version 3.2.25(0)-release (i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > $ ls -l /usr/local/bin/bash > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 676752 Nov 9 11:57 /usr/local/bin/bash > > Don't know why bash is writable by root but sh & ksh aren't. > > Seems like I've ended up with bash installed whether I like it or not: > > $ pkg_info -R bash-3.2.25 > Information for bash-3.2.25: > > Required by: > gnome-doc-utils-0.12.0 > libgnome-2.20.1.1_1 > rarian-0.6.0_1