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

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy, version two

"Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog@gmail.com> writes:

> On 23 Nov 2006 13:43:52 +0200, Jari Aalto <jari.aalto@cante.net> wrote:
> There's a difference between requiring maintainer scripts to say
> /bin/bash if they need bash constructs and rewriting existing scripts
> to work with some generic shell. The former is going to be *much*
> easier. Isn't that enough?

My point. If there is explicit "Depends: bash", then someone can post
a patch to provide alternative solution to a person who may not know
alternative constructs (having learned only bashism).

Note, that I did not suggest rewriting any existing scripts, but I was
looking forward to making the need of bash more transparent that what
it is now in packages.


Reply to: