Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
> Umm, could you explain why this is so?
I think it is reasonable to assume that "POSIX features" and "non-POSIX
features" translate to those which are and are not mandated by the
current POSIX standard.
Thus, shell scripts specifying `/bin/sh' as interpreter should only
use POSIX features. If a script requires non-POSIX features from the
shell interpreter, the appropriate shell must be specified in the
first line of the script (e.g., `#!/bin/bash') and the package must
depend on the package providing the shell (unless the shell package is
marked `Essential', as in the case of `bash').
Now, if I am wrong, and "POSIX features" means "those features Manoj
will claim are common sense", then the meaning changes slightly.
Another problem with this paragraph is that it doesn't state the "echo
-n" exception. Therefore, all #!/bin/sh scripts using echo -n are also
in violation. I presume that you will argue that this violates "common
sense" and that there is no point in clarifying this either. I suggest
amending the /bin/sh requirements to read as follows.
Shell scripts specifying '/bin/sh' as interpreter should only use
features that are reasonable. If a script requires features that
are not reasonable, the appropriate shell should be specified in
the first line of the script (e.g., `#!/bin/bash') and anyone who
experiences problems due to their choice of /bin/sh should be
ridiculed by histrionic demagogues until they can display a
modicum of common sense by writing a /bin/sensible-sh wrapper
that attempts to find the most suitable shell for the job.
I fail to see the value in claiming that POSIX-compliance is important,
yet declaring an exception (echo -n) with no technical merit, yet
opposing further exceptions.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Clint Adams <schizo@debian.org>
- Re: RFD: Essential packages, /, and /usr
- From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>