Re: Proposed new POSIX sh policy, version two

[Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>]

On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 10:20:07AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 09:51 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 23:55 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> > > > > Instead of focusing and hammering again and again on /bin/sh, why not
> > > > > instead ask maintainers to do #!/bin/dash?
> > > > 
> > > > Because the correct is #!/bin/sh and not to be tied on particular shell.
> > > 
> > > I can't tell what you mean.  There is nothing wrong with using
> > > #!/bin/dash if that's what the maintainer wants to specify.
> > 
> > And if the system does not have dash installed? And if the scrpts work
> > fine with the /bin/sh of his choice?
> 
> Obviously if you #!/bin/dash you must add a dependency, because dash is
> not an Essential package.
> 
> As I said, it is perfectly possible for a maintainer to write a script
> which works on any shell and allows the user to pick at installation
> time (heck, or even per-user!) which shell to use.

How cool that would be to be asked 10000 times at installation time
which shell should be used for ${SCRIPT}.

Mike