Importing mksh in base

[Cy Schubert]

First time I've tried replying inline on this newer phone. Bear with me as this reply may not look like I intend it to.

On January 25, 2019 11:07:55 AM PST, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
>
>Le 25 janvier 2019 18:12:58 GMT+01:00, Cy Schubert
><Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com> a écrit :
>>On January 25, 2019 8:57:51 AM PST, Baptiste Daroussin
>><bapt at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>>>Hi everyone,
>>>
>>>I would like to import mksh in base, https://www.mirbsd.org/mksh.htm
>>>And make it the default root shell (not necessary in one step)
>>>
>>>Why:
>>>1/ it is tiny 400k (in the packaged version) all other shells fitting
>>>the
>>>expectation are bigger
>>>2/ it's default frontend in interactive mode is very close to what
>>most
>>>people
>>>are used to with bash and shells as default root shell on other BSD
>>and
>>>most
>>>linuxes
>>>3/ from my narrow window csh as a default root shell is one of the
>>>major
>>>complaint (usually the first thing a user get faced to) from new
>>comers
>>>and
>>>also for some long timers who are reinstalling a machine and have not
>>>yet
>>>installed/configured a bourne compatible shell
>>>
>>>What this proposal is _NOT_ about:
>>>1/ the removal of tcsh from base
>>>2/ any kid of denial of the quality and interest or features of csh
>>>
>>>What do you think?
>>>Best regards,
>>>Bapt
>>
>>Why not ksh93 instead? It is the original and authoritative Korn
>shell.
>>EPL is compatible with the BSD license. Personally, I've been toying
>>with the idea of importing ksh93 for a while now.
>>
>
>The reason I chose mksh is because it is heavily maintained and from
>the testing I have done it was the "nicer" interface
>

Ksh93 is also heavily maintained.  Look at their github activity. My ksh93-devel port has been tracking updates (I consider important).

>>As to replacing root's shell, replacing tcsh is a large POLA
>violation.
>
>It will not replace in existing installation just make it the default
>in new installation I can t see how this is a POLA violation if it is
>in new setup on new major version (upgrades won t be affacted)
>
>> Maybe give users the option at install time instead. 
>
>Doable, unsure it is worth it but yes we can do that if that is asked a
>lot

I'm less concerned about this and am willing to concede this point if I have to.

However as ksh93 is IMO the better ksh and it's not a clone, it's the real ksh, and the license is compatible,  why would we settle on less than the real thing?



-- 
Pardon the typos and autocorrect, small keyboard in use.
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX: <cy at FreeBSD.org> Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org

	The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.