On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 09:56:33AM -0500, Chet Ramey wrote: > There has to be a compelling reason to change this, especially at a point > so close to a major release. > > You might be expecting too much from bash's random number generator. Is > the problem that its period is at most 2**16? For its intended uses, the > cycle length is acceptable. Do you disagree?
I suspect he doesn't share the same understanding of the "intended uses" of bash's $RANDOM as the rest of us. It's meant for displaying a random wallpaper image from a directory, or for playing a random audio file from a directory. Or for playing a number guessing game with a 6 year old. It is emphatically NOT for generating passwords.
