I'm boycotting FreeBSD until such time as they change the default root shell to ksh or something Bourne compatible. There's just nothing more frustrating then tcsh.
Do any of the BSDs now use bash, particularly since the latter is GPL3? But there are a plethora/bonanza of shells out there for Unix other than bash, tsh, tcsh, csh. Maybe FBSD could use ksh or zsh?
The ports tree has Bash 4.2.45, i'm not sure how up-to-date this is compared to linux.
As for a list of shells, the Ports tree reports 49 different shells, although some of them are just tools: http://www.freebsd.org/ports/shells.html [freebsd.org]
As for your question, FreeBSD does has KSH and ZSH.
As an addition to my previous comment. Upon further investigation (by which I mean I discovered bash --version), I found that the version of Bash in the ports tree is indeed a GPL V3 version of Bash. I assume this means that whilst the FreeBSD project can not use any GPL V3 code in the operating system itself (I believe by FreeBSD 10 they want to have removed all GPL code full stop), there is no restriction on the licencing used by software in the ports tree (within reason).
That is correct. They don't want GPLv3 in the operating system, but ports is OK. FreeBSD is very different from many Linux distributions in the sense that the operating system and most third party software is managed separate from each other. In Linux you often have a single package manager that handles both the operating system and all your software, with no clear distinction between them. In FreeBSD these are completely separate.
I have not checked lately, but it used to be the case that a lot of things broke if you changed the root shell. Maybe they have fixed that.
I think the "fix" for that is toor. You can change its shell to whatever you like and use it instead of root. Although I've never tried it; I just have an alias that calls sudo -i exec zsh -l, which seems to work great.
I have not checked lately, but it used to be the case that a lot of things broke if you changed the root shell.
I don't believe you've checked... EVER. There's nothing TO break by changing the root user's login shell.
All the services that start up (eg. crond) are completely ignorant of what root's shell is set to. Services don't go through the process of logging-in as root and then spawning processes... They use the setting and environment they inherited from the rc* scripts, from start-up, while the syst
You see but you do not observe.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, in "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes"
tcsh (Score:0)
I'm boycotting FreeBSD until such time as they change the default root shell to ksh or something Bourne compatible. There's just nothing more frustrating then tcsh.
Re:tcsh (Score:3)
Seems a stupid reason, because it takes all of 5 minutes to "fix."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The ports tree has Bash 4.2.45, i'm not sure how up-to-date this is compared to linux.
As for a list of shells, the Ports tree reports 49 different shells, although some of them are just tools: http://www.freebsd.org/ports/shells.html [freebsd.org]
As for your question, FreeBSD does has KSH and ZSH.
Re: (Score:1)
As an addition to my previous comment. Upon further investigation (by which I mean I discovered bash --version), I found that the version of Bash in the ports tree is indeed a GPL V3 version of Bash. I assume this means that whilst the FreeBSD project can not use any GPL V3 code in the operating system itself (I believe by FreeBSD 10 they want to have removed all GPL code full stop), there is no restriction on the licencing used by software in the ports tree (within reason).
Also, I quickly checked my Debian
Re: (Score:2)
That is correct. They don't want GPLv3 in the operating system, but ports is OK. FreeBSD is very different from many Linux distributions in the sense that the operating system and most third party software is managed separate from each other. In Linux you often have a single package manager that handles both the operating system and all your software, with no clear distinction between them. In FreeBSD these are completely separate.
Re: (Score:2)
I have not checked lately, but it used to be the case that a lot of things broke if you changed the root shell. Maybe they have fixed that.
I think the "fix" for that is toor. You can change its shell to whatever you like and use it instead of root. Although I've never tried it; I just have an alias that calls sudo -i exec zsh -l, which seems to work great.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe you've checked... EVER. There's nothing TO break by changing the root user's login shell.
All the services that start up (eg. crond) are completely ignorant of what root's shell is set to. Services don't go through the process of logging-in as root and then spawning processes... They use the setting and environment they inherited from the rc* scripts, from start-up, while the syst