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

Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal

On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 22:11 +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 02:34:37PM -0500, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> >On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 10:57 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Dash has a serious bug which is causing grief.
> >> >
> >> > The problem is that it overrides the system's "test" command (in
> >> > Debian, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[) and does so in a way which is
> >> > inconsistent with the Debian versions.
> As far as I can tell, /usr/bin/test and /usr/bin/[ are completely 
> useless, because none of bash, dash, posh, or zsh use them.  Maybe pdksh 
> does, but that's pretty much the list of shells that could be coerced 
> into being /bin/sh.  I propose we remove those executables from 
> coreutils if it turns out that they are never executed.

There are many cases where one may well want the test program.  We need
them regardless.

> >The only builtin which we identified needed to be on that list was test
> >itself, and the problem here was that the deviations in posh's
> >implementation of test would pose serious problems.
> The standard posh follows is Debian Policy.  If you change Policy, I am 
> pretty sure that posh will follow[0].  Policy currently specifies a set 
> of features that are required above and beyond minimal POSIX standards 
> (echo -n).

I don't know what the particular issue is with posh.  It was brought up
as an example in the policy discussion a while ago.

> I don't see what your problem is with posh.  It serves a legitimate 
> purpose: providing the bare minimum required by Policy.  It's useful as 
> a test of Policy-compliance, and not much more, which is fine.

I don't have a problem with posh.  It was brought up in the policy discussion the last time.


Reply to: