* Herbert Xu said: > > You are still going back to the script matter, but we are talking about the > > shell, *not* the scripts! Shell should, more, it HAS to provide all the > > expected features. That's IMHO, of course. > > Of course I'm going back the scripts, AFAIK nobody actually writes ash > scripts. So the only significant use of ash on Debian is as /bin/sh. Now > we have a policy that requires #!/bin/sh scripts to be POSIX compliant so > that this can happen. Problem is that we've got too many scripts which > just aren't compliant (at the moment anyway, someone mentioned that we can > get POSIX changed, maybe you guys should start lobbying now). So either Someone else said that POSIX 1003.1e allows arguments and parameters, so we need to have someone who has the Part II of the standard. Anyone? > we change the policy in which case I'll probably fork ash into two binaries > with one designed to be strict and the other one suitable as a /bin/sh, or > we'll have to start fixing scripts. The latter would be a real PITA... > It was foolish me to do this change so close to the freeze, that is why I've > reverted to the old behaviour in 0.3.5-8. However, once potato is released, > we'll still have to deal with this issue. Fair enough. marek
Attachment:
pgp71zTkFkNhs.pgp
Description: PGP signature