Re: bash essential (was: Perl essential ?)
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 02:36:32PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2001 20:22:25 +1100, Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org>
> wrote:
> >And so is bash, better remove it.
>
> I think this is already in the works by requiring /bin/sh to be a
> "only" POSIX compliant shell. I was quite astonished when lintian told
> me yesterday that I shouldn't have Depends: bash because bash is still
> essential.
Yes. The result of that policy is that bashisms must have
#!/bin/bash, not that dependencies on bash must be explicity. It will
be very easy to change lintian to report that if bash becomes
non-essential.
>
> btw, I don't think that having lintian barf on packages that
> explicitly depend on essential packages is a good idea. That a package
> is essential today does not mean that it is essential tomorrow. I
> would consider allowing explicit Depends: on essential packages a good
> idea. These Depends: do no harm at the moment, and will prevent bugs
> tomorrow.
True. But there would be a lot of them...
Jules
Reply to: