Re: Bugs in bash (was: Release-critical Bugreport)
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Joost Kooij wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jun 1999, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> > I think there should be a proper sh(1) man page in this case, which is NOT
> > linked to the bash(1) man page. It should list all features /bin/sh can be
> > expected to have, and nothing more.
> That would be kind of hard to implement in the current situation.
> What package should provide that sh(1) manpage? People will complain
> that their sh(1) doesn't document /bin/sh's actual behaviour if it so
> happens to be that their sh is bash. The manpage should also document
> the way Debian handles sh.
Once users start complaining this way, I would suggest calling this a bug
in bash (or whatever shell /bin/sh points to on their system).
I think bash should behave as a POSIX sh when called as sh. I realize
Debian may not be ready for this, but still I do think so.
rd1936: 12:40am up 8 days, 16:09, 5 users, load average: 1.32, 1.31, 1.31