Re: command -v in postinsts violating policy
Branden Robinson wrote:
> I don't have any specific problems with it personally. Other people in
> this thread have been saying it's unsatisfactory, IIRC.
I haven't seen any unresolved problems, which is why I asked.
> Ideally, I want:
>
> 1) a command that searches $PATH for an executable of the given name,
> ignoring aliases and shell functions
No worse than command -v anyway.
> 2) a command that with a flag can be told not to spew any output under
> any circumstances (a la grep -qs)
Which seems marginally better here, though I am still redirecting stderr
and stdout to /dev/null just in case.
> 3) a command that doesn't demand that we declare dependencies or
> pre-dependencies on a package just so we can use it our maintainer
> scripts
Check.
> Needless to say, even command -v is not ideal in my opinion. It just
> appears to be better than the existing alternatives.
command -v seems worse or equal to which.
--
see shy jo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: