On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:21 AM, David Benfell <benfell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I was only being a little bit snarky yesterday. But in truth, it isn't > just zsh features I prefer. For me, the ways in which zsh is > preferably incompatible with bash aren't just in zsh features (which > are indeed very cool) but in the ways that it interprets command > lines--ways which I think zsh handles more intuitively correctly. > > But that latter is an issue. It may break an (I assume) unknown number > of existing scripts if used for sh, so I think the likely conclusion > would be that *both* bash (for sh compatibility) and zsh would have to > be installed. I'm not opposed to this, but I'll certainly concede that > there are valid points to be made in opposition. We need /bin/bash and also /bin/sh to be provided by bash, so the 'bash' package is installed on the install media. We just install zsh in addition and default to that as the interactive shell. Pierre explicitly said that he wanted to do this release as a test, and if problems crop up in the feedback due to zsh, then we'll revert it in a future release. So, please test and let us know of any problems we might have overlooked. Cheers, Tom
