On 25/06/09 at 10:05 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:51:58 -0500, Raphael Geissert > <atom...@gmail.com> wrote: > >Side effects: > >* Errors caused by the use of bashisms. > >* Faster boot, builds, and general usage of /bin/sh scripts. > >* Reduced memory footprint when running /bin/sh scripts. > > > >Counter side effects: > >* During the following weeks I will be working on providing patches for the > >known issues (check the list at [1]), > >* and performing another archive-wide checkbashisms check on binary packages, > >* debian/rules, > >* and then an archive rebuild with dash as /bin/sh should follow. > > Do you have statistics about how many packages would be instantly RC > buggy because they have #!/bin/bash scripts and would now need to > depend or even pre-depend on bash? Since bash is essential, it is a > bug to explicitly depend on bash, and after the change it will be a > bug to not depend on bash.
It won't: bash stays the default shell for interactive use, so it stays essential as well. -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
