[egorfine]

> we'd all still be using the Bourne shell

Please forgive me my ignorance but what's wrong with bash? I'm still using it on all servers and workstations, I constantly write scripts for it, some fairly complex. It's not an obsolete project and it looks like a mainstream shell for me. Am I wrong?

Update: yeah, I realize now that this was about the original Bourne Shell, not bash.

[dagw]

Bash is not Bourne, and that's the point. Bash is the Bourne Again Shell, a shell written to improve and replace the Bourne shell in the GNU ecosystem. Modern bash is a huge improvement over the original Bourne shell and I'm convinced you use bash only feature basically every day, and would be very annoyed if someone forced you to use the actual Bourne shell

[egorfine]

Ah, right! I do remember the original Bourne Shell, though. I wouldn't like to get back to using it. Though I might agree provided I get as many years of my age back.

[mprovost]

Bash isn't the Bourne shell (sh)! It's a replacement (Bourne Again Shell). But it's interesting that the replacement has become so entrenched that folk assume that it was the original.

[egorfine]

Yeah, got it now lol