Rod Taylor wrote:
Please don't do that.bash-2.05b$ ls /bin/bash ls: /bin/bash: No such file or directorybash-2.05b$ uname -aFreeBSD home 6.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE #13: Sat Nov 5 00:19:49 EST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/HOME amd64bash-2.05b$ ls /bin/*sh/bin/csh /bin/sh /bin/tcsh
Yes, the script would have run before, but it wouldn't have worked correctly. Now it fails with a clear reason: it requires bash. Perhaps we should go farther and remove the bash dependency. This change didn't break anything that wasn't already broken, nor fix anything. It simply made the failure mode more clear.
The problem is that for 90% of the maintainers of this script, /bin/sh is bash, so it is hard to ensure that the use of bash features does not creep into it. Is installing bash on FreeBSD onerous? It is the default for Linux and for cygwin, which have far greater market share than FreeBSD. Requiring compatiblity with something that's difficult for most developers to test makes it fragile, and I'd rather add a dependency for FreeBSD and Solaris users than make this more fragile.
Doug ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Nutch-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nutch-developers
