Re: List of packages shipping shell scripts with bashisms + MBF proposal
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 16:59 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Raphael Geissert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Atm, checkbashisms only complains with this:
> >> _From_: bashisms-amd64-2.10.15/libtool_1.5.26-1_amd64.deb
> >> possible bashism in ./usr/bin/libtool line 1218 (trap with signal
> > numbers):
> It's weird that it calls this a "possible bashism". It's not a
> bashism (at most, it's an XSI-ism) and it's so pervasively
> supported that even Autoconf uses it.
In hindsight, checkbashisms may not have been the best name for the
script, but checkscriptcompliestosus isn't quite as catchy. :-)
I'm debating adding an option to ignore XSI-isms when checking scripts.
However, I will add that a) the check is also in lintian, albeit only
for maintainer scripts and b) so far as I can see, using it in scripts
with a /bin/sh shebang is technically a policy violation, even if not
one that people care about.