Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:35:01 +0100
From:      Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org>
To:        Phillip Salzman <psalzman@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>, Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org>
Cc:        Yarema <yds@ingress.net>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: X desktop contest? + Desktop Env
Message-ID:  <19981111113501.B9740@cons.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811101909360.14483-100000@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>; from Phillip Salzman on Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 07:16:09PM %2B0000
References:  <19981110151438.A15464@cons.org> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811101909360.14483-100000@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm just adding noise in replying, but anyway...

In <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811101909360.14483-100000@gamefish.pcola.gulf.net>, Phillip Salzman wrote: 
> > I don't think that makes sense. bash2 is now the "standard" shell for
> > userfriendly Unix accounts (and works well, BTW). If we ship a
> > slightly different default shell, we'll be flooded with PRs from
> > people used to bash. And zsh has quite some subtle differences (IMHO,
> > it is much worse than bash2).
> 
> 	Bash is far from standard.  Just a lot of people use it, and some
> like it.  sh and csh are the standards.

Yesyesyes, but:

- For basic sh functionality, zsh does not implement what Posix sais a
  /bin/sh should do while bash2 does pretty well.
- When people are used to extended features, they are used to bash
  features. If they happend to use zsh or whatever they probably know
  how to install a shell themself.

> 	Shipping with bash as the default shell is utterly stupid,
> expecially for an OS like FreeBSD.

I didn't say default shell. The /bin/sh that is used by the base
system (startup, scripts etc.) shouldn't be bash.

But if the 'easy2use' port is installed on the system, 'adduser' or a
GUI equivalent should use bash2 as the default shell for new
accounts. 

> > And I don't think the license matters that much in this case,
> > either. A more comfortable shell is for those people who want it and
> > as long as the system still runs when you remove it, a GPL software is
> > fine.
> > 
> 	The license has a lot to do with it.  We cannot ship with bash
> installed by default because we run off of the ``Berkeley Style'' license.
> This differs a lot from GPL, and you cannot split an OS up into two
> different licenses.
> 
> 	We can, infact, offer it as a third party software enhancement.
> Like we do now, via the ports/packages.  Maybe something at the end of the
> installation saying "Would you like to include a more userfriendly shell?"
> or of the sort.

You are misleaded. Would you please count the number of GPL programs
we ship as part of the base system?

Also, I want bash2 as default for new accounts if a certain port is
installed, so bash2 could stay a port as well.

> >   ports/<somethink>/easy2use
> > which depends on X11, bash2, fvwm2/95, some file browser, a stupid X
> > editor, less, a Web browser with default to
> > /usr/share/doc/handbook/index.html, Mail and News reader. Just use the
> > most commonly used tools (see logfile from wcarchive for
> > pub/FreeBSD/packages). 
> > 
> 
> 	not fvwm95, eww! ;)  But something basically of the sort - but it
> will be rolled out and designed for FreeBSD.  Something like that.

"Designed for FreeBSD"?

The desktop I have in mind would be pretty OS neutral, except for some
Chuck pictures here and there. And it's speed if 4 ghostscripts run
simultaneous, of course :-)

Martin
-- 
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer
  Tel.: (private) +4940 5221829 Fax.: (private) +4940 5228536
  Paper: (private) Waldstrasse 200, 22846 Norderstedt, Germany

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981111113501.B9740>