Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy, version two
On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 04:42:45PM +0100, Bill Allombert <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 01:15:28AM +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > I would drop that "special" case and always require explicit
> > requirement for the shell. It's more clear to see which packages
> > "need" bash to make them work. someone may then provide a patch to
> > "make bash go away". I suggest removing the last 2 lines:
> Personnally I rather look forward for the day where the use of shells
> for non-interactive task is deprecated in Debian.
What would you like instead ? perl ? python ?