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

Re: Switching /bin/sh to dash (part two)



On Thu, Jul 23 2009, Raphael Geissert wrote:

> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 21 2009, Raphael Geissert wrote:
>>>
>>> The goal of dropping bash from essential is not to remove bash from the
>>> systems (or from Debian), it is about making packages really using it
>>> depend on it.
>> 
>>         Can you explain why this added dependency is a good thing, apart
>>  from creating more work for people?
>
> I'd prefer if this is discussed when the proposal is actually made

        And I prefer to cut off silly proposals in the bud, if at all
 possible, before significant  effort is spent on it. The question is, is
 this proposal silly? In order to evaluate that, we have to find out
 _why_. The Embedded folk have made a reasonable argument for not
 wanting the weight of bash or zsh. Understandable, though it represents
 a smallish, competent section of the user base.

> (not to mention that I'm not really the person who plans to carry
> it).

        If you are really not the competent person to defend the idea,
 perhaps you should not be so free to assert it as a truism.

> But well, one of the ideas is to avoid having such extra stuff deeply
> tied to the core system, i.e. essential.

        That's it? The time to try to reduce the set of Essential
 packages is to deny entry to new  items (like dash),  since once the
 package is essential, people (and not just package maintainers) come to
 rely on it. Our user base, in particular, has had 15+ years to rely on
 bash -- and there are loads of user scripts, support systems, cron
 jobs, third part packages -- that need bash.

        Once something is marked essential, it takes a lot of pain to
 remove it, and transition the user base off the package. Oh, gee, I
 think it is a good idea to not have bash essential perhaps does not
 meet the cut when trying to determine if the pain that one must go
 through is worth the return.

        manoj
 leaning towards silly
-- 
I couldn't possibly fail to disagree with you less.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


Reply to: