Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)

To: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
Cc: debian-policy@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)
From: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 10:59:42 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20061106095942.GB28847@glandium.org>
Mail-followup-to: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>, debian-policy@lists.debian.org, debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 87velttf63.fsf_-_@windlord.stanford.edu>
References: <87y7r59bkw.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <20061025180132.GA10298@roeckx.be> <878xj46xk0.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com> <87lkn09pqt.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <[🔎] 87velttf63.fsf_-_@windlord.stanford.edu>

On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 07:41:40PM -0800, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
> +	    <item>the <tt>-a</tt> and <tt>-o</tt> <tt>test</tt> operators
> +	      must be supported</item>

Why is that needed ?

Mike

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy
  - From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
- Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)
  - From: md@Linux.IT (Marco d'Itri)

References:
- Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)
  - From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)
Next by Date: Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy (was: First draft of review of policy must usage)
Previous by thread: Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy
Next by thread: Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread