Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 14:39:16 +0300 From: "Giorgos Keramidas" <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: "Ertan Kucukoglu" <ertank@ozlerplastik.com> Cc: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Bash Message-ID: <000a01bfbf2f$2b1619a0$12c536d4@eidiko4> References: <m2zopswrui.fsf@reader.ptw.com> <002101bfbeb1$ec3a5d40$12c536d4@eidiko4> <3920E503.C4D91FE8@ozlerplastik.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > If you are daring enough, you can change the shell of root to > > /usr/local/bin/bash and have toor log into that /bin/csh beast. > Hello, > > I want to ask a question about bash. Why don't we just copy the > /usr/local/bin/bash to /bin/bash? So, there will be no problem if the /usr > is not mounted for any reason. If you compile your bash static, and it does not need any libraries in order to run properly, then that is definitely the way to go.. However, the last time I saw a statically compiled bash, my heart jumped in terror :-)) > Nobody suggested that before, and do not see any problem with it. Well, yes. I suppose that for maintenance tasks, i.e. for booting a few times in single user, a lot of people feel comfortable enough with either /bin/csh or /bin/sh. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000a01bfbf2f$2b1619a0$12c536d4>