On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:03:34AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > I think that, to convince people that flexibility won't cause stability > and complexity problems, you're going to need to present a complete and > fairly bulletproof implementation plan. Given how difficult the bash to > dash transition was, I think it's going to have a fairly high bar to meet.
dash still has two outstanding multiply-release-ignored grave bugs as a result of the last transition. A minimum demonstration of competence on the part of anyone proposing to change the shell again is to fix those RC bugs without introducing new ones. > That being said, I think removing the use of diversions for handling the > default shell and simplifying the current situation would remove > complexity, and therefore should be strongly considered. Once that's > done, if you really want to change the root shell on your own system, it > should again be possible to use a simple local diversion to do so. Yes. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
