current community

your communities

more stack exchange communities

Stack Exchange
tour help
Take the 2-minute tour ×
Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems.. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 1 down vote favorite

i.e.

  • Using something like IPython, re.pl, or somesuch as a login shell, instead of bash/ksh/etc.
  • Using initscripts, etc. written in Python or some other scripting language, and making no use of shell scripts whatsoever
  • Not having any POSIX-compatible command shell installed

In other words I'm thinking of more a Windows-like approach, where the "CLI" is a REPL interface for a true scripting language (a la Powershell) that most programs are completely independent of.

Is this feasible? How reliant are Linux ports of desktop programs like Firefox, or web services like Apache, on having a working POSIX shell? How about the Linux kernel itself?

share|improve this question
1  
It's feasible, it's just going to be a whole lot more work than it's worth. I can't think of a single advantage to doing it this way. Firefox isn't reliant on bash at all and outside of the initscript, neither is Apache. –  Joel Davis Sep 25 at 14:24

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

I believe the Linux kernel does not depend on a POSIX shell, (though will look for the #! line when executing files).

I suspect it is possible to have a working Linux system, but most software will expect mostly POSIX-compliance, and desktop software will typically expect most of LSB (Linux Standard Base) compatibility too. Many applications, such as Firefox, use (POSIX) shell wrappers to run, so these will not work without modification.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.