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

Re: Public service announcement about Policy 10.4

On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 01:16:36PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > I would like to point out that the following are not POSIX features:

> > local
> > test -o
> > test -a

> Regarding "local", see #294962.  I would like to see support for
> "local" added to posh and "local" added as an exception to the
> "POSIX-only" rule laid down in 10.4.

Well, please note that posh is not the only shell that lacks support for
local.  IIRC, it also breaks down under one or more of dash and busybox sh.

> See #267142 for a long discussion of the "POSIX-only" rule.

> I support the idea of requiring #!/bin/sh scripts to be runnable on
> posh.

I don't.  One might as well be able to expand "posh" as the "Pathologically
Overstrict SHell"; while Policy's mandate of POSIX sh is important as a
standard, the practical impact is nil once you start questioning those POSIX
extensions that are supported by all of bash, ksh, dash, and busybox.  There
are many bugs of much greater practical importance that people could be
working on instead.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: