On Fri, Jul 24 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 04:33:21AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> Steve, let's take a step back and calm down.
>
>> Are you saying that your objection to engineering a solution where
>> dash doesn't need to be essential is that it's not worth the effort?
>> I *think* that was the point of your message but am not entirely sure.
>
> Yes, that's definitely my position. From what I can see, engineering a
> solution where dash doesn't need to be essential isn't worth *any* effort,
> because IMHO, so far the arguments for being able to remove dash from the
> system appear entirely contrived.
I think you are not going far enough. Why should I have dash on
the system when my default shell is posh? or (gasp) zsh?
I think one of the objections here is that we ought to have a
more generic approach that allows shells other than dash/bash to be the
default shell, and that the vendor not make the choice.
manoj
--
"We learn from history that we learn nothing from history." George
Bernard Shaw
Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
