Re: bash exorcism experiment ('bug' 762923 & 763012)
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:10:00AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Oct 15, Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> wrote:
> > If you target posh, you target all shells that policy allows for --
> > including those that are smaller and/or faster than dash.
> Can you list some, and what benefits they would bring over dash?
No, mostly because I don't care enough.
But that's *also* not the point. The point is that we have a policy
which states particular things, and that you should follow that policy.
If you think policy is wrong, you're welcome to change it; doing so
really isn't hard, especially if your change is technically sound. In
the absense of any such change, however, you should either change your
shell script to be policy-compliant, or change your shebang to pick an
explicit shell rather than /bin/sh.
Not doing so is a bug, plain and simple.
It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer
-- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26