begin Glenn Maynard quotation: > Of course, scripts intended to run under plain /bin/sh should be tested > with a shell that actually emulates it, which bash doesn't, but I don't > see much of a gain in going through the pain of writing a shell script > without any bash extensions that's intended for use on a Debian system, > which always has bash available. The Debian boot floppies have ash, but not bash, because of size concerns, so any package that might need to be installed from that environment cannot use bashisms in its installation scripts. It seems simpler to just say "no bashisms in package scripts" rather than distinguish between those that might need to install when bash is not available, and those that can depend on it. It would seem like asking for trouble to say "no bashisms in base packages, but other than that it's okay" -- people would tend to forget. Craig
Attachment:
pgpnk2RnLSI5D.pgp
Description: PGP signature