Bug#267142: huh?
> > But you are not calling /usr/bin/test, and the likelihood that you
> > will get /usr/bin/test without using a full path is somewhere between
> > infinitesimal and nil.
>
> Actually, that's not true. Perhaps you haven't read much on what
> guarantees Policy makes about maintainer scripts.
>
> In any case, if you really mean what you say here, then you must be
> supporting OPTION 4. If *that's* what you mean, why didn't you say
> so?
Perhaps I worded that poorly. I'll try again.
But you are not calling /usr/bin/test, and the likelihood that you
will get the GNU coreutils test without using a full path is extremely
low.
> Regardless, can you please decide what you would prefer first, and
> only then post? This incessant dancing around, refusing to actually
> state *your* opinion about the best course of action, only makes the
> process more frustrating. It may be entertaining for you, but it's a
> PITA for me.
If you mean with regard to changing policy, I may have articulated that.
Otherwise, I think the best course of action is for everyone to convert
their #!/bin/bash scripts to #!/bin/sh scripts, make their #!/bin/sh
scripts happily portable to the degree that the people who have been
filing 10.4 sane bugs want them to be, drop the Essentialness of bash,
and then everyone will have an easier time installing a system on a 16MB
flash card.
> Can you please try and just say what you think the world should look
> like? I feel as if you got in this only because someone filed a
> foolish bug against posh. If that's true, then you can please stop
> kvetching about the present case, unless you truly have something
> concrete to contribute instead of repeatedly rehashing things?
I will refrain from kvetching or contributing further until an
unspecified time in the future.
Reply to: