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

Shipping /bin/sh [Re: Moving bash from essential/required to important?]

On 04/05/2011 11:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Carsten Hey wrote:
>> * Steve Langasek [2011-04-04 19:37 -0700]:
>>> On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 02:00:36AM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote:
>>>>  * 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.
>> I agree that this seems to be orthogonal at first, and even second,
>> sight.
> And third.  The correct way to manage /bin/sh is as a configuration file.
> That means:
>  * dash would stop shipping /bin/sh in its data.tar
>  * bash would stop shipping /bin/sh in its data.tar
>  * an essential package (doesn't matter which --- maybe debianutils)
>    should take care of allowing other shells to influence where
>    /bin/sh points.
> Policy 10.7.4 ("Sharing configuration files") spells this out.  It
> doesn't have much to do with whether dependencies on bash are made
> explicit.

Well, that will only happen when it's cristal clear that it's guaranteed
that /bin/sh exists and is functional at all times in such a scenario.

You are welcome to implement such a solution, but if it does not meet
the above criterion, it will very probably not be adopted.



Reply to: