Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:51:18 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Tim Kientzle <kientzle@acm.org> Cc: imp@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything Message-ID: <20031123225117.GA24696@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <3FBC50DB.3000002@acm.org> References: <62981.24.0.61.35.1069202574.squirrel@mail.yazzy.org> <200311190103.hAJ13Nlg000923@dyson.jdyson.com> <20031119015433.GN30485@roark.gnf.org> <3FBC2053.6040208@mindspring.com> <20031120022009.GB29530@dan.emsphone.com> <3FBC29EF.3030009@mindspring.com> <3FBC50DB.3000002@acm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> As I pointed out earlier, some of the heat here comes > from the fact that /bin/sh is currently overloaded: > > * It is the default system script interpreter, used > by the rc scripts and many other things. As such, > it must start quickly. > > * It is the default user shell for many users. As such, > it must support NSS. > > So far, I haven't seen anyone in this thread seriously > argue against either of these points. I'll seriously argue against the 2nd point above. I don't know of a SINGLE person that uses /bin/sh as their interactive shell when multi-user. Not ONE. Every Bourne shell'ish user I've ever met uses Bash, AT&T ksh, pdksh, zsh. > Richard Coleman wrote: > >It seems /bin/sh is the real sticking point. > > There is a problem here: Unix systems have historically used > /bin/sh for two somewhat contradictory purposes: > * the system script interpreter > * as a user shell > > The user shell must be dynamically linked in order > to support centralized administration. I personally > see no way around that. Given that many users do > rely on /bin/sh, it seems that /bin/sh must be > dynamically linked. > > There are good reasons to want the system script > interpreter statically linked. > > Maybe it's time to separate these two functions? I argue the two functions are already separated as /bin/sh as interactive shell doesn't really exist outside of single user. We should build /bin/sh static and be done with the argument. Or rather, lets find a /bin/sh interactive user and have him argue that /bin/sh needs NSS support. I dare say that will be a thread two orders of magnitude shorter than this one. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031123225117.GA24696>