From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Apr 16 11:31: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674FA37B8F8 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA28949 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:30:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id UAA01770 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:30:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from obie.softweyr.com (obie.softweyr.com [204.68.178.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D3B37BA73 for ; Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:29:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from softweyr.com (Foolstrustident!@homer.softweyr.com [204.68.178.39]) by obie.softweyr.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA16690; Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:29:43 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Message-ID: <38FA06E0.43004E28@softweyr.com> Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:30:56 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Shells References: <31345.955883432@zippy.cdrom.com> <38F9A104.3F54BC7E@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Julian Elischer wrote: > > Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > > > Two reasons of the top of my head: GPL'd and gratuitously incompatible. > > > > GPL'd things go into /usr/src/gnu - no big deal. If we were overly > > squeamish about the GPL then we wouldn't have "grep" or a compiler > > toolchain either, among other things, and I doubt anybody's arguing > > for killing those. The ash shell is just bad enough that I'd consider > > a change of license for a truly functional shell out-of-the-box to > > be a more than acceptable trade-off. > > From the perspective of a company using FreeBSD embedded, /bin/sh > is not an otional component so we would want a non GPL version > if we could get it. Luckily it isn't linked with anything like > (say) gdbm but it's yet another GPL pin in the 'minimum system' > I need for an embedded system. The size of BASH is also a consideration > when I'm trying to ge everything into a 2MB flash. > if you do want BASH in the base system, please don't take away ash. Again, zsh might be a better option here. The license is good, and the static binary size is smaller than bash, though larger than ash. Zsh sports the ease-of-use interactive features we seem to be clamoring for in this thread. I have been a bash user for many years, but would not want to put bash in an embedded system for fear of contaminating the code base; Julian's point is well founded. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message