Re: dash bug which is affecting release goal

[Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>]

On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 01:54 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
>   Well, policy describes usage, and usage (I think) is to assume that
> /bin/sh gives you a decently recent POSIX environment (I said POSIX not
> GNU) and that if you rely on GNU extensions of tools (like echo -e) you
> should call those commands using their full path wich can be done using
> really simple tricks like:
> 
>   echo() { /bin/echo "$@" }

I believe Policy prohibits the use of full paths to specify programs in
the standard PATH.

>   Policy has absolutely no valid reasons to dictate to shells how they
> are implemented, and it's a perfectly sane thing for an efficient enough
> shell to implement echo, test, [, true, false and probably which as
> shell builtins given their pervasive use in shell idioms.

Policy requires that programs which provide the same names as each other
provide equivalent functionality.  No exception (currently) is made for
test.  I am not at all opposed a carefully written exception for test;
that is the substance of Colin's proposal.

Thomas