Le mer 23/07/2003 à 15:59, Chris Halls a écrit : > On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:29:12PM +0200, Jérôme Warnier wrote: > > Chris, did upstream reply to the question about the need of tcsh in the > > build process? > > I asked on the IRC channel and Sander, who is a tcsh fan, just asked why we > should want to replace it. No other response. If you want to pursue it, > you could ask on dev@tools.openoffice.org For me, it is pretty simple: because I have no other package needing it on *any* of the Debian machines I currently run, and I don't see any single reason to use it. But well, off course, if there are good reason to keep it (like portability on other platforms), let's keep it. I would not replace it for "bash" or "ksh", but for a smaller, "essential" one, like "ash", I think. I'll drop a mail there. > Chris -- Jérôme Warnier <jwarnier@beeznest.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=