On 2022-02-27 Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 01:40:48AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...] >> This should use "command -v", not which, I think?
> No, and the recent debacle revealed enough reasons that I'm pondering a MBF > to change that _back_ in packages which followed the bad advice. > Among others, "command -v" > * gets confused by aliases > * it fails to check +x perm both in dash and bash. While this is something > required by POSIX, neither shell in unstable checks that, reporting the > command as executable if it's not. > * built-ins get reported as available. And busybox has even "dpkg" > built-in, with a pretty bad implementation. [...] Hello, Is any of this relevant in the context Debian package building (especially by autobuilders)? The only thing I can see is if $developer had a nonexec ~/bin/somecommand and wondered why the local behavior differed from the autobuilders. Aliases are a non-issue. Built-ins (like command -v) actually are available, and when the respective command is called the builtin will be used. cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'