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 at an-striker01 ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release CentOS release 6.7 (Final) [root at an-striker01 ~]# which bash /bin/bash [root at an-striker01 ~]# ls -lah /bin/bash -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 885K Sep 22 2015 /bin/bash [root at an-striker01 ~]# which sh /bin/sh [root at an-striker01 ~]# ls -lah /bin/sh lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Mar 27 18:40 /bin/sh -> bash Same upstream on Fedora 23: 0 root at pulsar:/home/digimer# cat /etc/redhat-release Fedora release 23 (Twenty Three) 0 root at pulsar:/home/digimer# which bash /bin/bash 0 root at pulsar:/home/digimer# ls -lah /bin/bash -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1.1M Jan 11 06:02 /bin/bash 0 root at pulsar:/home/digimer# which sh /bin/sh 0 root at pulsar:/home/digimer# ls -lah /bin/sh lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 4 Jan 11 06:02 /bin/sh -> bash -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education?