[linux-elitists] Freeing parts of Unix?

Aaron Lehmann aaronl@vitelus.com
Wed Jun 13 14:02:36 PDT 2001

On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 09:32:21AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 04:49:32PM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> > I really wouldn't want to see sh -- judging by experiences with
> > Solaris' sh.
> Yeah, I tend to agree. What *would* be very valuable is ripping bash up,
> and creating a lightweight shell for smaller (read single-user and
> embedded) systems.

 "ash" is a POSIX compliant shell that is much smaller than "bash".
 We take advantage of that by making it the shell on the installation
 root floppy, where space is at a premium.
 It can be usefully installed as /bin/sh (because it executes scripts
 somewhat faster than "bash"), or as the default shell either of root
 or of a second user with a userid of 0 (because it depends on fewer
 libraries, and is therefore less likely to be affected by an upgrade
 problem or a disk failure).  It is also useful for checking that a
 script uses only POSIX syntax.
 "bash" is a better shell for most users, since it has some nice
 features absent from "ash", and is a required part of the system.

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list