Re: bash should not be essential

[mbaker@iee.org (Mark Baker)]

In article <[🔎] Pine.LNX.3.96.971121183055.4478A-100000@cantor.unex.es>,
	sanvila@unex.es (Santiago Vila Doncel) writes:

> Yes, bash is essential because we always *need* a POSIX shell. But GNU
> bash provides *two* of them: /bin/sh and /bin/bash. Only /bin/sh should
> be essential.

However, dangling symlinks are not terribly useful, so it would be nice for
/bin/bash to be around too.

> Do you still think that "the use of { } makes the rules files clearer and
> avoids duplication"?

I don't know whether Ian does, but I do. I find

	cp /very/long/path/foo /very/long/path/bar baz

a lot harder to read than

	cp /very/long/bath/{foo,bar} baz

And your suggestion of

	(cd /very/long/path; cp foo bar baz)

is even worse IMO.
.