On Sun, 2012-02-05 at 14:41 -0500, Charles Wilson wrote: > We're not debian, and don't explicitly exclude the use of bashism in > *ALL* [/usr]/bin/*.sh scripts. Even debian doesn't disallow bashisms i > *usr*/bin/ scripts -- and as /bin == /usr/bin on cygwin, we can't realy > distinguish between /bin/*.sh and /usr/bin/*sh. Some of our scripts, in > fact, have sh-bang lines explicitly requiring bash (e.g. cygport). > > So...I'm not sure this is a totally useful tool for cygwin; it might > lead to unnecessary list traffic: > > "Hey, checkbashisms complains about /usr/bin/cygport, please fix..." > > I realize this doesn't require votes as it is already in debian, and I > certainly have no veto power, but if it did require votes I'd be giving > it a '0' not a '+1'.
You make valid points, but I suppose it would still be useful for someone writing sh scripts on Cygwin to check their portability to stricter /bin/sh shells on other systems. So while I'm hardly overwhelmed by the necessity for adding this package, its not completely useless on Cygwin either. Yaakov