Re: Bourne shell deprecated?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On 04/26/2016 07:21 PM, Digimer wrote:
On 26/04/16 10:07 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
On 4/26/2016 6:45 PM, Jack Bailey wrote:

Today someone in a meeting claimed the Bourne shell is deprecated, one
of the reasons being it supposedly has security issues.  Well that's
all news to me, and I cannot find anything online to corroborate the
claim.  Is this true, is it a bash vs. Bourne FUD, or something else?

there's no Bourne shell in CentOS anyways, /bin/sh is a symlink to
/bin/bash...

last OS I can think of with an actual Bourne shell was Solaris.

??

[root@an-striker01 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS release 6.7 (Final)

[root@an-striker01 ~]# which bash
/bin/bash

[root@an-striker01 ~]# ls -lah /bin/bash
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 885K Sep 22  2015 /bin/bash

[root@an-striker01 ~]# which sh
/bin/sh

[root@an-striker01 ~]# ls -lah /bin/sh
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Mar 27 18:40 /bin/sh -> bash

Yes, Red Hat and most (all?) GNU/Linux distributions have used bash as far back as I can remember.

Some of the BSDs use to have a bourne shell and maybe some do, I don't know.

bash is mostly compatible with bourne (can run most bourne scripts) which is why /bin/sh is a symlink to /bin/bash on GNU and most other *nix systems.

Bourne is for all practical purposes dead.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux