Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:36:24 -0500 From: Dan <dan-freebsd-questions@ourbrains.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: root /etc/csh Message-ID: <20081116033624.GA13618@ourbrains.org> In-Reply-To: <20081116023239.GA89267@icarus.home.lan> References: <20081110110805.GK1302@obspm.fr> <20081110161002.GA81960@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <20081110203643.GH27646@obspm.fr> <200811102235.46971.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <Pine.GSO.4.63.0811102239200.846@hmacs.cmi.ua.ac.be> <4ad871310811101530p7b2baa0fk7f7b5118e314c11d@mail.gmail.com> <4918CE42.3050504@ccstores.com> <20081115061957.GA10998@ourbrains.org> <20081116023239.GA89267@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeremy Chadwick(koitsu@FreeBSD.org)@2008.11.15 18:32:39 -0800: > > Problem solved. Why doesn't FreeBSD ship bash and other shells besides > > the `sh' linked statically is beyond me. It wouldn't break ports, would > > it? > > It does break ports. Very, very badly. I know because I've personally > attempted replacing /bin/sh with bash as a "I have a weekend to spare" > project. You misunderstand. I do not suggest replacing the standard shell with bash, I suggest that the shells available in FreeBSD, even through ports to be linked statically so they can be used for rescue and recovery. If the default make instructions told to compile statically, it wouldn't break the ports.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081116033624.GA13618>