Hi Lars! On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:41:14 +0200, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > On ke, 2011-04-06 at 16:37 +0100, Lars Wirzenius wrote: >> Obviously, doing these changes earlier rather than later in the release >> cycle would be good, if they are to be done at all. > > OK, so assuming anything is to be done about this at all, here's what I > suggest: > > * add a lintian test that detects scripts that are needlessly > #!/bin/bash according to checkbashisms; the test can't be > extremely reliable, but would probably be good enough > * get project consensus on whether bash should remain essential or > not (so far my reading of this thread indicates it is > inconclusive); if there is no consensus, stop here Given how far you have already gone with the analysis, I would stop here in no case, especially considering... > * do another mass bug filing on all packages that contain bash > scripts that checkbashisms does not think contain any bashisms ...there is no point using #!/bin/bash when the script is POSIX-compliant, since the default #!/bin/sh on Debian (dash) is faster than bash. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
Attachment:
pgpRUNRFLtSdC.pgp
Description: PGP signature