shells/bash port, add a knob which symlinks to /bin/bash ?

Garrett Cooper yaneurabeya at
Sun Sep 14 22:50:13 UTC 2014

On Sep 12, 2014, at 14:38, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery at> wrote:

> "No" (as portmgr).
> Ports should not be touching the base system like this. Let's NOT go
> backwards and add a /bin/bash. In fact the /usr/bin/perl one will be
> removed soon as well.
> If we can actually eliminate ports touching /usr and / (not including
> /usr/local and /var) then we gain a very large memory optimization for
> package building by being able to ro null-mount these to the build jails.
> There's no reason for bash (and perl) to be exceptions to the 24000
> other ports that install to /usr/local/bin. I can think of dozens of
> other ports that will fall into the same arguments being made here, but
> it does not mean it is the right thing for FreeBSD.
> If you want to install the symlink on your system feel free to do it. I
> install a static bash to /bin/bash on mine and only because I prefer
> bash shell and want it in / for single-user mode. That's my personal
> choice though.
> The proper fix is to fix scripts to be portable and use #! /usr/bin/env
> bash rather than /bin/bash.
> We install all packages to PREFIX=/usr/local by default. Why should a
> bin symlink be an exception? There's no suggestion for symlinking
> includes or libraries which also hit users often.

Hi Bryan,
	I understand portmgr’s reasoning for removing these knobs as it improves “portability” (builds and runtime won’t depend on broken code), but I see the merits of making a separate package for Linux “compatibility” for the various items that people have brought up (mostly the LDAP issue and the vendor/legacy script portability issue). Plus it makes the barrier for entry lower, and less of a reason for Linux users to complain about how FreeBSD is different from Linux. Adding these as options to the port(s) won’t work for various reasons, two of which came to mind are:
	1. People should be able to install packages from instead of having to roll their own ports with custom options.
	2. It’s best not to build other packages on unportable (/bin/bash) behavior.

PS I don’t agree with Fedora/FreeDesktop’s push to move everything to /usr (I think it’s a wee bit radical, to say the least, and seems like it’s optimizing the wrong thing), but it’s something to keep in mind as this non-portable decision may start working its way into upstream ports: .
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <>

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list