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

Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy



* Thomas Bushnell BSG (tb@becket.net) [061116 09:35]:
> On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 09:30 +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > * Matthias.Beier.Gronau@gmx.de (Matthias.Beier.Gronau@gmx.de) [061115 18:31]:
> > > 1. /bin/sh can be a symbolic link to any shell.
> > 
> > I don't think we allow to any shell - but there are more possibilities
> > than just /bin/bash.
> 
> So can we just decide what the possibilities are and then put those in
> Policy and be done with it?

No, because policy doesn't work that way.

There is no reason to restrict us to a list of shells - there is a
reason to restrict us to a list of features.

Anyways, it seems that Manoj, Russ and almost everyone else (i.e.
everybody except you) agree what we should do, so I would call that a
rough consensus, and just go ahead.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/



Reply to: