Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'd like to tighten this up a bit by requiring that /bin/sh adhere to
> the consensus of implementations, where POSIX leaves things
> unspecified. What follows is one possible revision. The wording
> isn't ideal; I'm open to suggestions.
I object most
Zack Weinberg schrieb:
>
> ! The standard shell interpreter `/bin/sh' is a
> ! symbolic link to a POSIX compatible shell. Since the POSIX
> ! standard for shells leaves important areas unspecified,
> ! wherever it is lacking, `/bin/sh' shall follow the
> ! cons
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 11:36:04AM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
> Zack Weinberg schrieb:
> >
> > ! The standard shell interpreter `/bin/sh' is a
> > ! symbolic link to a POSIX compatible shell. Since the POSIX
> > ! standard for shells leaves important areas unspecified,
> > ! wh
Hi
Zack Weinberg schrieb:
> This has come up before. Remember the endless argument over echo -n?
> In the end that led to an explicit additional requirement on /bin/sh
> being written into policy. The only alternative I see to my proposal
> is to continue to add explicit additional requirements
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 12:33:20PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 10:49:28PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 11:08:01PM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > > > The other is that it's completely wrongheaded
> > > > to convert a policy
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 08:23:44PM +0200, Arthur Korn wrote:
> Note that there is currently no /bin/sh alternative. (why not?)
Technical reasons, AFAIK.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary
Anthony Towns wrote:
> > You are the release manager. File the bugs, declare them
> > release critical [...]
>
> Okay. Whatever. I really don't have the patience for -policy anymore.
You know, neither do I. Manoj, have fun waiting until woody + 2 or
whenever you want and then documenting som
On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 09:13:31PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> I'd like to tighten this up a bit by requiring that /bin/sh adhere to
> the consensus of implementations, where POSIX leaves things
> unspecified.
I disagree, on the grounds that this exchanges an arguably specific standard
for a com
> > > You are the release manager. File the bugs, declare them
> > > release critical [...]
Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Okay. Whatever. I really don't have the patience for -policy anymore.
On Sun, May 20, 2001 at 10:17:48PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> You know, neither do I. Manoj, have fun waitin
9 matches
Mail list logo
