Re: bash-isms in packages
Justus Pendleton <justus@ryoohki.res.cmu.edu> writes:
> along similar lines, it doesn't make sense to me to have bash's
> priority as "required". it's definitely, "important", but according
> to debian policy, required means necessary for proper functioning of
> the system -- which bash obviously is not. /bin/sh is, but other
> shells can provide that.
I could be wrong, but I believe that it was decided that any Debian
system would always include bash, hence it's "required" status. That
way, maintainers can just assume that it exists, and write scripts
that depend on it.
I do agree that technically people should be putting #!/bin/bash at
the top of their scripts rather than #!/bin/sh unless they are sure
that the script contains no bash-isms, but since bash is in fact
required by policy (as I recall), and sh is linked to bash, it really
doesn't matter.
I would say that trying to remove bash from a Debian system, and
circumvent the sh link is probably just a bad idea.
--
Rob
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: