Re: bash should not be essential
Hi,
I agree with the statement that any script that uses bashisms
should in fact start with the string #! /bin/bash.
Do we know of any other shell that is POSIX compliant? Bash,
invoked as /bin/sh, has a stated goal of being a POSIX compliant
shell, and I think is quite good at it (I can't make a more definite
statement since I have not run conformance tests on it).
Until we have alternates, bash shall have to remain
essential. Even when alternatives emerge, we may still need to keep
bash essential to ensure backwards compatibility for packages and
people who have assumed that /bin/bash shall allways exist on Debian
machines. Also, there is the technical issue of ensuring a POSIX
/bin/sh (virtual packages can't be marked essential).
Unfortunately, this debate is decaying into a holy war for and
against bash. Personally, I do not feel this is an issue we have to
solve (not yet, anyway). I think we have more important things on our
plate (hamm, the ever growing bug list, deity, etc)
I feel it is time for me to step out of the way of this
rapidly spinning debate ...
manoj
--
How many Zen masters does it take to screw in a light bulb?
None. The Universe spins the bulb, and the Zen master merely stays
out of the way.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: