Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy, version two
On Fri November 24 2006 14:42, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 14:03 -0700, Bruce Sass wrote:
> > On Fri November 24 2006 13:15, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > > Instead of focusing and hammering again and again on /bin/sh, why
> > > not instead ask maintainers to do #!/bin/dash?
> >
> > because bash offers a larger superset of sh features than dash, and
> > "sh" is a standard part of System V-like unix systems like Linux
>
> But #!/bin/sh scripts aren't allowed to use those. What I'm saying
> is that the energy spent on making rules about #!/bin/sh would be
> better spent encouraging people to simply switch--when
> appropriate--to #!/bin/dash.
If someone uses dash features not included in, both, the spec for "sh"
and other Bourne shells allowed to become "sh", they should use
#!/bin/dash. IMO. bash is in the same boat.
> > > There may well be advantages to dash for this or that
> > > application. So then, maintainers should be encouraged to use it.
> > > The best way, of course, is #!/bin/dash.
> >
> > and stop using "sh" altogether, or should the www.emdebian.org
> > people fork the entire distribution?
>
> What I said was that *if* it is better for a given script to run with
> dash than with bash, the maintainer should be encouraged to say
> #!/bin/dash.
Sure, but since all "sh" scripts would be better off if they specified
dash as their command interpreter... #!/bin/sh use would disappear.
> I don't think it's my job to start saying what *other* distributions,
> which are not Debian, should do.
but it is Debian's job to be responsive to its users needs and Debian
has made a choice to strive for susv3 compatibility
- Bruce
Reply to: