[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bashims in debian/rules

This stuff about essential virtual packages is all very interesting,
and perhaps worthy of consideration as a future dpkg feature, but:

It's current policy that _bash_ (not just a POSIX shell) is available,
and may be used in preinst and postrm scripts and elsewhere.
Therefore making bash nonessential and instead ensuring the presence
of a POSIX shell wouldn't satisfy our current policy.

If you want to change the policy and say that bash shouldn't be
essential then please come to debian-policy and we'll talk about it.
It might be worth considering how many packages currently use bashisms
in places where only an essential package will do.

Note that I'm _not_ suggesting that /bin/sh should always be bash.
Scripts which use bashisms should use /bin/bash, but currently they
are allowed to do so and rely on /bin/bash existing and being bash.


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: