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

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy

Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:

>         I would rather get away from this wording totally.
> ,----
> |  "Shell scripts specifying /bin/sh as interpreter must only use POSIX
> |  features, additionally, they may assume that echo -n .... . Also,
> |  they may use test -a/o and the local directive in shell functions,
> |  as long as ....  If a shell script uses features beyond this set
> |  listed, then the appropriate shell must be specified in the first
> |  line of the script (e.g., #!/bin/bash) and the package must depend on
> |  the package providing the shell (unless the shell package is marked
> |  "Essential", as in the case of bash). "
> `----

>         This does specify what the scripts may expect, but drops all
>  wording from this section regarding what the policy expectation of
>  /bin/sh is.

Yeah, that was the direction I was going to try to go with my next
revision.  Thank you!  I'll probably nab that wording pretty much as-is
and try to put together a patch.  (I've almost finished the PAM module
work that I needed to do, and in another day or two I should have a fix
for the libpam-openafs-session bugs that I need to go upgrade to RC.)

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: