Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 22-Dec-2005, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) wrote: >> On Wednesday 21 December 2005 18:41, Bas Wijnen wrote: >> > If it is meant to be executed, it should be executable. >> > If it is not, it should not have the shebang line. >> >> I disagree, there's nothing wrong with clearly documenting what >> shell variant a script is written in, on the contrary IMHO > > A shebang line is more than documentation: it is a strong indication > that the script will be executable from the command line. To have that > expectation not be matched by the file's permission mode is a recipe > for confusion.
The fact that the script is not in the path isn't enough for you here? And don't you think that anyone who knows that a shebang lines indicates executability from the command line would easily solve the problem of a "permission denied"? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
