On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 04:04:39PM +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> It's easier to eyeball packages that explicitly announce "bash".
> Those could be put to a stress test through:
It's also relatively trivial to just run through the archive, looking
for shell scripts and at least sh -n them from various shells of your
choice.
Sure, but it's more time consuming that using the 'Depends: '
Until Debian ships with /bin/sh pointing to dash or posh by default, a
"Depends: bash" line isn't going to be reliable anyway, because a lot of
maintainers won't notice that their package depends on bash, and the ones
that do should probably just remove the bashisms.
--
Dwayne C. Litzenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
