Re: Question about "Depends: bash"
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:21:43PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
[snip]
> I don't care about making anything sh-agnostic. bash is just a
> language; dash is just a language. We don't insist that our C programs
> be C-compiler-agnostic; we don't insist that lisp or scheme programs be
> dialect-agnostic; why should we insist this for shell programs?
Well, code that only compiles using, for instance, gcc v2.95, is frowned
upon. And the fact that we need to lug around automake1.4, 1.7, 1.8,
and 1.9 is scary (but if I understand things correctly, some of that
comes down to bad software design on the automake side rather than bad
makefiles).
[snip]
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
Reply to: