On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 03:19:33PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
You know, any person who is not a total illiterate have little problem
changing their shell, or the shell of the root user. There is nothing
that force you to keep the default.
IMO, having capable and useful defaults is a big part of a usable system.
Sure, I *can* change the shell, just like if /usr/pkg/bin wasn't in the
default .profile (or .cshrc) I *could* add it, or if we weren't using
"less" as the "more" command I *could* install it myself, or if we didn't
have a pkg_add command I *could* go build things myself, but that's time
that could be better spent doing other things.
This whole request to change the default shell of root is really stupid,
for various reasons. And the arguments for doing the change are so weird
I can't relate to them.
Like I said, I guess I can't be bothered. I've given up. This ain't BSD
anymore, except for the deceptive name. And I've run out of energy
eh? Is "BSD", and NetBSD in particular, really defined mostly by the shell?
I kind of figured it was more things like careful thought put into the
architecture of various systems, plus a bit of a general style for a whole
set of commands that focuses on avoid unnecessary bits.
trying to improve the world. I'll just recommend anyone who ask me to
just go and install Linux instead, since it's at least coherent in its
brokenness.
Are you really saying csh is better? I got the impression that your
argument so far was more along the lines that it's more "traditional",
and while that can be useful as a supporting argument, it seems a poor
reason on it's own.