On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:22:27 -0800, Steve Langasek <vor...@debian.org> wrote: >On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:02:21AM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >> Steve Langasek dixit: > >> >(For values of "permanently" that include "we now have two implementations >> >of sh in Essential, because no one has done the work to let us get rid of >> >bash".) > >> Maybe because the offered alternative sucks so much. > >You are totally, completely, 100% missing the point. We can't remove bash >from Essential because packages are silently using /bin/bash without >depending on bash, because they've been *told not to*. This is not about >your hobby horse issue of whose /bin/sh is better, it's about the fact that >once an interface makes its way into Essential, we have a very hard time >removing it.
The first step would be to change policy to no longer deprecate depending on bash if one uses รค!/bin/bash scripts. The second step would be a lintian warning if a package contains a #!/bin/bash script without depending on bash. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/e1vsdhh-0000od...@swivel.zugschlus.de