Re: Bug#478850: posh: $ENV variable processed by non-interactive shells
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 09:52:16PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, 1 May 2008 14:47:54 +0100, Clint Adams <email@example.com> said:
> > On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 02:33:04PM +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> >> I don't really care about the "interactive" side of things ($ENV,
> >> $PSx, job control), but I tend to consider that for the scripting
> >> side of things, the optional features should be implemented. For
> >> instance, if you don't have command -v, there's no other reliable way
> >> to find out whether a command exists or not. So you have to have
> >> something (either "command -v" or "type").
> > If policy wants to mandate either "command -v" or "type", we could
> > conceivably move toward dropping "which" from debianutils.
> Well, type does not have a uniform implementation right now. And
> very few as as scripting friendly as which (most require you to remove
> junk from the output). Command -v also has mi9xed success.
That said, which(1) has similarly non-standard output on other
platforms. But indeed the reason I originally wrote the which(1) that
ended up in debianutils is exactly that I was fed up of unparseable
output and wanted something coherent. It'd be a great shame to drop it
and thereby no longer have something we can rely on at least in Debian.
(Not to mention that reshuffling tools just for the sake of it is a
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]