[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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: