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

Re: Upload of new texlive packages

Norbert Preining <preining@logic.at> wrote:

> Hmm, for me .sh was a shell extension, not specific for sh in contrast
> to bash. I never use .bash extensions. Is this considered good style to
> have .bash extensions if you want bash as interpreter?

Well, some people consider *any* extension to be of bad style (for
programs). I recognize it's a bit ugly for real programs, but for
scripts used as part of a build system, why not. It gives relatively
useful info without having to look at the file contents.

As for the bash vs. sh thing, I just map .sh to /bin/sh (in my mind),
and since the latter is supposed to follow POSIX in Debian, I conclude
that .sh should be used for POSIX shell scripts (in Debian).

And as for .bash, I believe I've seen that elsewhere, and anyway, it
doesn't hurt.

>> Haha. I'm rather averting my eyes and running away!
> ;-) Me too. But I can show you even better ones if you like ...

I you don't have to dig too much to find them, go ahead. Make us laugh!
... or shudder...

>> - Same problem with foo{bar,baz} non POSIX-globbing in texlive-extra.
> As it was to be expected. WOuld it be an option to specifiy
> 	SHELL=/bin/bash
> in the debian/rules file? Then I wouldn't have to care for this, or?

I think it's a good solution.

> Best wishes and again, thanks a lot!!!

You've done a lot of work, and your packages passed my little tests.
Good, uploaded.

Oh, and er, before I leave... the description of the texlive package
needs to be fixed:

Short description: s/TeX live/TeX Live/ (you should check at least all
                   your debian/control files for that...)
Long description: you don't say *anything* about the binary package
'texlive'. You have to repeat what is written in the short description
(maybe worded differently), i.e. "A decent selection of the TeX Live
packages". You can say it's a metapackage providing a decent selection
of TeX Live packages, etc.

You can refer to
if in doubt.



Reply to: