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

Re: Public service announcement about Policy 10.4

On Aug 01, David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> wrote:

> I think we should require that a base install should be POSIX
> compliant; for everything else we can be a bit more lax.
I see lack of a rationale here.

> But unlike some others, I don't see the point of rejecting patches
> to fix XSI:isms/bashisms in various shell scripts.  It's one thing to
I do. It's yet another divergence from upstream and it has no practical

> Having POSIX-clean scripts also ensures that busybox sh will be
> able to run the scripts, something that's *very* useful on embedded
> Debian-based systems.
I highly doubt that it's worth using busybox *and* normal debian
packages on the same system.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: