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

Re: Moving bash from essential/required to important?

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:00:36AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
> Before bash or dash could be made non-essential in a clean way, there
> are IMHO various things not mentioned up to now in this thread to fix:

>  * Fix #428189, either by adapting the policy to reality or vice versa
>    (depending on the maintainers decision) as prerequisite to fix the
>    next point without breaking things afterwards.

This doesn't appear to be relevant to moving bash out of Essential.  dash,
which would still be Essential (no one is proposing removing /bin/sh from
Essential!), also has printf as a shell builtin.

It would be good to resolve this bug in its own right, but it appears to be
orthogonal to whether bash is Essential.

>  * Find a sane solution for managing /bin/sh.  Currently diversions are
>    used, which looks like the wrong tool for this job to me.  There are
>    also some related bugs with a high severity.

Also seems to be orthogonal.

>  * Make dash conform to POSIX.  dash/sid is not detected as being
>    a POSIX shell by autotools, which leads to lines like #!@POSIX_SHELL@
>    to become #!/bin/bash and thus introduces useless dependencies on
>    bash.

Do you know what exactly it is about dash that autoconf believes is not
POSIX-compliant?  My understanding was that dash *is* POSIX-compliant, but
that this is not enough to satisfy autoconf's specific requirements.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: