Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ's patch is no good, at least, it does not address the problems I > have raised in the past.
> A Posix shell is allowed to have a builtin for ANY command without > restriction, and as long as the builtin has the behavior specified by > Posix for that command, it is a "Posix compatible shell." That's correct; I'm not attempting to address this problem in this proposal. This is a problem with the current Policy wording and continues to be a problem with the new Policy wording, so this change is not a regression in this regard. I'd prefer to separate the question of what shell features need to be supported from the question of how to handle the general built-in issue, since I think there's more project consensus around the former than around the latter. The only overlap in this case is with the test command; local is not a meaningful external command, and the test behavior required by my patch is a subset of what would be required under your proposal. > I have proposed as an alternative that we say that a shell is suitable > for Debian's /bin/sh if its builtins behave just as do the Debian > programs installed in the standard paths, and then we can make a > specific set of exceptions for builtins that we don't care if they > behave the same way as Debian's versions. My impression of the previous Policy discussion was that there was not a consensus around this change, so I'm trying to reach a consensus around a simpler incremental change that deals with one problem (while still leaving others opened). This should in no way be taken as a cutting off of debate of the larger issue. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
