On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 01:22:19PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Hi everyone, > > as shown in http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.release/17423 > there's currently a discussion to use dash as /bin/sh instead of GNU bash. > > Until now, /bin/sh used to be a symbolic link to /bin/bash, unless dash and, > later, mksh offered to install themselves there instead, as per Debian poli- > cy, which states that all POSIX compatible shells can be used as /bin/sh. > > While I don't have an issue with dash being the default /bin/sh we should > implement a mechanism for the user to select which shell he wants there, > via debconf. Luckily, the Debconf tutorial by Joey Hess, found online at > http://www.fifi.org/doc/debconf-doc/tutorial.html, has shown a sample for > packages to do it (scroll down to “Choosing among related packages”). > > I propose that bash, dash, mksh, AT&T ksh and possibly ksh get amended by > such template. As I gather from the tutorial (please correct me if I'm > wrong), all packages involved would have to have the exact same debconf > choices, scripts and PO files. So I'd be more at rest if someone who is > really familiar with debconf and po-debconf were the one to start this, > with upgrade paths for the already existing ash (ancient), dash and mksh > choices. > > If Debian is not going to implement this choice, you'd probably have to > change the policy which _does_ allow users to use any POSIX compatible > shell as /bin/sh. > > Please Cc: me on answers, as I'm not subscribed to this mailing list. > Thanks in advance! > > I'm not a Debian developer, I just maintain the mksh package because > I'm the upstream author of mksh. (Testing is done on kfreebsd-i386 sid.)
debconf is definitely not the proper way. Using alternatives is. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O [EMAIL PROTECTED] OOO http://www.madism.org
pgpNxL3ZIlm9x.pgp
Description: PGP signature
