Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2000 16:18:05 -0700 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami), Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>, "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/tcsh - Imported sources Message-ID: <20000415231805.33B311CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Message from Warner Losh <imp@village.org> of "Sat, 15 Apr 2000 16:05:04 MDT." <200004152205.QAA29099@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Warner Losh wrote:
> In message <vqc7ldz9g9p.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> Satoshi - Ports Wraith -
Asami writes:
> : I wouldn't say "people generally" argued against" it. Peter Wemm,
> : myself and a lot of other committers supported it, saying that tcsh is
> : just a newer and maintained version of our old csh.
>
> Agreed. Those that argued against it sited size.
>
> : I do remember people setting up strawman arguments about embedded
> : systems just to be knocked down by the embedded folks themselves. :>
>
> Well, I am an embedded folk and argued for the change. However, my
> boss argued against, so that more than cancels me out :-)
>
> Warner
What I saw was something like this:
- the people complaining about the size started yelling, and if you saw only
the first day or two of the discussion, you'd have got a pretty one-sided
view of opinion (ie: don't do it).
- Then, once people who liked and used tcsh saw the way the discussion was
going, they jumped in and (IMHO) there was an overall concensus to do it,
with a couple of holdouts mostly on the size issue.
The way I read things, there were several basic groups of opinions:
1: why the hell are we shipping csh anyway, and with root using it by
default?? I change root's login immediately after install!
2: I love my csh and will die before using anything else!
3: If we are going to ship a csh, it might as well be the more usable
and more up to date tcsh. Most of this group didn't seem to care what
root's default shell was or were in favour of root being sh by default.
#2 is taken care of by the csh port. The people inconvenienced by having
to install a csh port is *far* smaller than the group inconvenienced by
having to install the tcsh port.
People in group 1 really aren't affected all that much if csh == tcsh as
they don't use it anyway (apart from the size - I guess Yet Another build
option could fix that). FreeBSD is *far* from an ideal embedded OS target
by default - a lot of trimming is required, tcsh vs csh is a drop in the
ocean compared to other things (eg: the wasted space in /modules).
IMHO, the way to keep most people happy (or least unhappy :-]) is to finish
the tcsh thing, and change root's shell to /bin/sh and probably change the
default new-user shell to sh as well if it isn't already.
I know a lot of people stopped reading the thread fairly early on. Please
refrain from commenting unless you go back and read the thread to
completion - lets not have the same things argued about all over again.
(This isn't aimed at anyone in particular, just a general request).
Cheers,
-Peter
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000415231805.33B311CD7>