|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > November 2006 > Question about "Depends: bash"
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Question about "Depends: bash"
|
|
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-19, 1:17 pm |
| Hello,
Regarding the discusion about POSIX and sh I have a grave problem.
My scripts (or better programs) are using #!/bin/bash because I use
BASH specific extensions.
You say: "BASH must not be a Depends: since it is Essential."
Oops my $USERS complain about it, since they have removed this huge
shell from the System and running anything else.
Please tell me what to do! (Put "bash" into Depends: ?)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jim Crilly 2006-11-19, 1:17 pm |
| On 11/18/06 10:50:30PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Regarding the discusion about POSIX and sh I have a grave problem.
>
> My scripts (or better programs) are using #!/bin/bash because I use
> BASH specific extensions.
>
> You say: "BASH must not be a Depends: since it is Essential."
>
> Oops my $USERS complain about it, since they have removed this huge
> shell from the System and running anything else.
I would say it's your users that have the problem, bash is "Essential: yes"
and "Priority: required" so removing it is unsupported.
> Please tell me what to do! (Put "bash" into Depends: ?)
Tell your users not to do that.
Jim.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andreas Metzler 2006-11-19, 1:17 pm |
| Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> wrote:
> Regarding the discusion about POSIX and sh I have a grave problem.
> My scripts (or better programs) are using #!/bin/bash because I use
> BASH specific extensions.
> You say: "BASH must not be a Depends: since it is Essential."
> Oops my $USERS complain about it, since they have removed this huge
> shell from the System and running anything else.
> Please tell me what to do! (Put "bash" into Depends: ?)
[...]
Educate your users to read and *not* ignore this:
WARNING: The following essential packages will be removed.
This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing!
bash
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 to remove and 55 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B of archives.
After unpacking 2126kB disk space will be freed.
You are about to do something potentially harmful.
To continue type in the phrase 'Yes, do as I say!'
cu andreas
--
The 'Galactic Cleaning' policy undertaken by Emperor Zhark is a personal
vision of the emperor's, and its inclusion in this work does not constitute
tacit approval by the author or the publisher for any such projects,
howsoever undertaken. (c) Jasper Ffforde
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Oleg Verych 2006-11-20, 1:29 am |
| On 2006-11-18, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Regarding the discusion about POSIX and sh I have a grave problem.
>
> My scripts (or better programs) are using #!/bin/bash because I use
> BASH specific extensions.
Please, list them *all*. I'm really concerned about GNU bash and getting
_rid_ of it, providing users with tutorial on how do this without loosing
*any* functionality.
--
-o--=O`C info emacs : not found /. .\ ( is there any reason to live? )
#oo'L O info make : not found o (R.I.P. Debian Operating System)
<___=E M man gcc : not found .-- ( TNX, RMS. )
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Andreas Barth 2006-11-20, 7:30 am |
| * Oleg Verych (olecom@flower.upol.cz) [061120 03:48]:
> On 2006-11-18, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> Please, list them *all*. I'm really concerned about GNU bash and getting
> _rid_ of it, providing users with tutorial on how do this without loosing
> *any* functionality.
The policy manual has a different opinion on whether Dependencies on
essential packages should be listed or not (and it concludes on not).
BTW, it is not difficult to generate a list of scripts that use bash w/o
specifying a "Depends".
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Oleg Verych 2006-11-20, 7:30 am |
| On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 10:22:55AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Oleg Verych (olecom@flower.upol.cz) [061120 03:48]:
>
> The policy manual has a different opinion on whether Dependencies on
> essential packages should be listed or not (and it concludes on not).
>
> BTW, it is not difficult to generate a list of scripts that use bash w/o
> specifying a "Depends".
Sorry for bad English. I mean "BASH specific extensions", and
functionality of shell scripts in general. Two quick examples of what
i mean are:
o `echo -e' bashizm -> printf shellizm
o `arrays' bashizm -> tmp=$@ ; set -- $ARRAY ; use_array $@ ; set -- $tmp
Of course, if very-very specific one is used, it may be hard to find
solution. And i just don't want to grep man bash on all of them. Let
users describe what they use, maybe it's possible to solve by ordinary
shell.
--
-o--=O`C info emacs : not found /. .\ ( is there any reason to live? )
#oo'L O info make : not found o (R.I.P. Debian Operating System)
<___=E M man gcc : not found .-- ( TNX, RMS. )
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-21, 1:31 am |
| Hi Jim,
Am 2006-11-19 13:43:29, schrieb Jim Crilly:
> I would say it's your users that have the problem, bash is "Essential: yes"
> and "Priority: required" so removing it is unsupported.
I know, but even on this list I have read several times
that peoples have removed this huge Shell.
> Tell your users not to do that.
Not directly MY users but Debian users!
The next time I get messages about this topic I use "d".
Note: It seems they have created a Fake-Package
using "equiv" to get rid of this warnings...
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-21, 1:31 am |
| Am 2006-11-19 19:16:00, schrieb Andreas Metzler:
> Educate your users to read and *not* ignore this:
Debian Users! - I have read it even on THIS list,
that some peoples remove it since it is to huge.
> WARNING: The following essential packages will be removed.
> This should NOT be done unless you know exactly what you are doing!
I know this warning and I have written too all
which have complaint about it.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Ben Armstrong 2006-11-21, 1:31 am |
| On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:58:58 +0100
Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> wrote:
> Am 2006-11-19 13:43:29, schrieb Jim Crilly:
>
> I know, but even on this list I have read several times
> that peoples have removed this huge Shell.
Huge?
Installed-Size: 1848
I would not call that huge (unless you are building an embedded system, but that is a whole different kettle of fish).
But if they are concerned about the memory footprint of the shell used by default as /bin/sh, that is another matter. They can always install dash and symlink /bin/sh to it. This will not break scripts that use bash (unless they call bash as #!/bin/sh,
but if they do, that's a bug in the script).
Ben
--
,-. nSLUG http://www.nslug.ns.ca synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca
\`' Debian http://www.debian.org synrg@debian.org
` [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
[ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jim Crilly 2006-11-21, 1:31 am |
| On 11/20/06 05:58:52PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2006-11-19 19:16:00, schrieb Andreas Metzler:
>
>
> Debian Users! - I have read it even on THIS list,
> that some peoples remove it since it is to huge.
>
~30M is huge? I can understand wanting to save space on things like
embedded systems but if these have normal sized drives tell your users to
suck it up and stop it.
Jim.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Marco d'Itri 2006-11-21, 7:25 am |
| On Nov 20, Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> wrote:
> Debian Users! - I have read it even on THIS list,
> that some peoples remove it since it is to huge.
People are stupid. Next.
--
ciao,
Marco
| |
| Ian Jackson 2006-11-21, 1:20 pm |
| Oleg Verych writes ("Re: Question about "Depends: bash""):
> o `arrays' bashizm -> tmp=$@ ; set -- $ARRAY ; use_array $@ ; set -- $tmp
This is another piece of bad advice: this approach is buggy if the
arguments might contain whitespace, which is often the case (eg if
they're filename arguments).
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Darren Salt 2006-11-21, 1:20 pm |
| I demand that Oleg Verych may or may not have written...
[snip][vbcol=seagreen]
[snip]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Sorry for bad English. I mean "BASH specific extensions", [...]
.... and "losing".
--
| Darren Salt | linux or ds at | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| RISC OS, Linux | youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
| + Burn less waste. Use less packaging. Waste less. USE FEWER RESOURCES.
Wisdom is knowing what to do with what you know.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jari Aalto 2006-11-21, 7:22 pm |
| Ben Armstrong <synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> writes:
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:58:58 +0100
> Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> wrote:
>
> But if they are concerned about the memory footprint of the shell
> used by default as /bin/sh, that is another matter. They can always
> install dash and symlink /bin/sh to it. This will not break scripts
> that use bash (unless they call bash as #!/bin/sh, but if they do,
> that's a bug in the script).
I believe he meant that.
The memory footprint[1] of bash is bothering in old PC's, so there are
real benefits trying to make without it; even on command line sessions
where alternative shell, like /bin/mksh, whose capabilities will
surpise even the bash enthusiasts.
Jari
[1] Stem desktop project for Debian
See near the end, under heading "4.3 Can I save even more memory - how?"
and Picture 17 titled "Memory consumption of various shells."
http://debian.cante.net/stem/faq/index.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Tollef Fog Heen 2006-11-22, 1:17 pm |
| * Oleg Verych
| o `arrays' bashizm -> tmp=$@ ; set -- $ARRAY ; use_array $@ ; set -- $tmp
This is in no way equivalent (with dash):
\u@\h:\w$ set -- "abcd efg" "hij"
\u@\h:\w$ echo $@
abcd efg hij
\u@\h:\w$ echo $1
abcd efg
\u@\h:\w$ tmp="$@"
\u@\h:\w$ set -- blah
\u@\h:\w$ set -- $tmp
\u@\h:\w$ echo $1
abcd
\u@\h:\w$
If you need arrays, use bash or a proper programming language.
--
Tollef Fog Heen ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are : :' :
`. `'
`-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-22, 1:17 pm |
| Am 2006-11-20 02:48:10, schrieb Oleg Verych:
> On 2006-11-18, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> Please, list them *all*. I'm really concerned about GNU bash and getting
> _rid_ of it, providing users with tutorial on how do this without loosing
> *any* functionality.
I am using things like
Arrays
${#NAME}
${parameter:-word}
${parameter:=word}
${parameter:offset}
${parameter:offset:length}
disown
OK, some of thease can be constructed but it takes some time longer.
I have already tested some of my scripts and tried to change it, but
the it works in one shell but not more in another...
So I stay with BASH.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Night
Michelle Konzack
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| David Weinehall 2006-11-22, 1:17 pm |
| On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 07:31:37PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
[snip]
> ${#NAME}
> ${parameter:-word}
> ${parameter:=word}
These are supported in SuSv3 compliant shells too.
> ${parameter:offset}
> ${parameter:offset:length}
These are not.
> disown
You actually use job-control in your shell-scripts? Interesting...
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Oleg Verych 2006-11-22, 7:22 pm |
| On 2006-11-22, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Oleg Verych
>
>| o `arrays' bashizm -> tmp=$@ ; set -- $ARRAY ; use_array $@ ; set -- $tmp
>
> This is in no way equivalent (with dash):
>
> \u@\h:\w$ set -- "abcd efg" "hij"
> \u@\h:\w$ echo $@
> abcd efg hij
> \u@\h:\w$ echo $1
> abcd efg
> \u@\h:\w$ tmp="$@"
> \u@\h:\w$ set -- blah
> \u@\h:\w$ set -- $tmp
> \u@\h:\w$ echo $1
> abcd
> \u@\h:\w$
>
> If you need arrays, use bash or a proper programming language.
Guys. Once more. Spaces is your problem, not my.
In case of spaces in file names, what isn't such a synthetic test
case, i would use temp. file with them, and would read it by lines.
Array means you have some kind of index or iterator, i think, it's ok
with temp. file and ok 2 times if you deal with files.
Real problem is different 'set --' implementations. In bash it honors IFS in
dash it doesn't. Both don't honor quotes for pathname expansions (as
i've mentioned, -f helps). busybox has its own "set --".
As big thread about POSIX shell shows, one must have a real documetation
to implement features. BaSH's man page doesn't have clear line between
"shiny-features" and "a must" for bourne shell. Many bashizms are right
from there.
As all this GFDL ... thing shows who is right, i will work towards
"Debian Viva, GNU R.I.P.", as development and answer to my footer.
--
-o--=O`C info emacs : not found /. .\ ( is there any reason to live? )
#oo'L O info make : not found o (R.I.P. Debian Operating System)
<___=E M man gcc : not found .-- ( TNX, RMS. )
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Oleg Verych 2006-11-22, 7:22 pm |
| On 2006-11-22, Michelle Konzack wrote:
[]
> I am using things like
>
> Arrays
> ${#NAME}
In dash there is one, but i don't know about `*' and `@' there.
> ${parameter:-word}
> ${parameter:=word}
Both work.
> ${parameter:offset}
> ${parameter:offset:length}
Here you know what and where parameter has. Is it better to split it?
> disown
This one not needed, unless you are in x-terminal, AFAIK.
> OK, some of thease can be constructed but it takes some time longer.
>
> I have already tested some of my scripts and tried to change it, but
> the it works in one shell but not more in another...
>
> So I stay with BASH.
Yes... Kind of web-programming...
There's some documentation available, so will see. Hope it isn't kind of
"undefined", "implementation defined".
____
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-24, 1:22 pm |
| Am 2006-11-22 01:15:59, schrieb Jari Aalto:
> The memory footprint[1] of bash is bothering in old PC's, so there are
But what do you mean with an OLD PC?
A 486? Such computers should run busybox anyway.
For example my IBM TP570 (PII/366MHz/192MB)
is happy with /bin/bash and fast enough.
> real benefits trying to make without it; even on command line sessions
> where alternative shell, like /bin/mksh, whose capabilities will
> surpise even the bash enthusiasts.
I have tried a bunch of them and some have realy nice extension. :-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-24, 1:22 pm |
| Am 2006-11-21 11:06:23, schrieb Marco d'Itri:
> On Nov 20, Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> wrote:
>
> People are stupid. Next.
N.C. except :-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-24, 1:22 pm |
| Hello David and *,
Am 2006-11-22 20:06:29, schrieb David Weinehall:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 07:31:37PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> [snip]
>
> These are supported in SuSv3 compliant shells too.
Ah, OK.
>
>
> These are not.
:-(
>
> You actually use job-control in your shell-scripts? Interesting...
Some of my scripts/programs working on all $USER serial and since
only one $USER at once is not enough, I span subprocesses and disown
it. Each subprocess write a PID and if it terminates, it delete it.
Now, the mainprocess watch it and start only a given number of
subprocesses. I use this since several years without any problems
on a bunch of my fileservers where I have at least 500 users/server.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2006-11-24, 7:19 pm |
| On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 00:02 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
> "fast enought" is in the eye of a beholder. Try with PII/64M with
> X deskop with 20 sessions of bash open. And opening firefox and xchat.
What on earth is this nonsense about multiple invocations? Do you not
understand what shared text is?
>
> Anyway. What works for some is no indication of that it works for all.
> I'm not sure why people are so enthustiastic with bash. It's just a
> shell and there are alternatives to it - which are quite nice.
I never understood what was so wonderful about perl. Yet, Debian
decided to make PERL Essential, so there it is. Such decisions have to
be made.
Nobody is telling you not to use the alternatives. Go ahead! Use them!
Encourage other people to!
But don't tell me that I *must* use the alternative.
Thomas
| |
| Jari Aalto 2006-11-24, 7:19 pm |
| Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> writes:
> Am 2006-11-22 01:15:59, schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
>
> But what do you mean with an OLD PC?
>
> A 486? Such computers should run busybox anyway.
PII with 62-128M, fairly common.
> For example my IBM TP570 (PII/366MHz/192MB)
> is happy with /bin/bash and fast enough.
"fast enought" is in the eye of a beholder. Try with PII/64M with
X deskop with 20 sessions of bash open. And opening firefox and xchat.
>
> I have tried a bunch of them and some have realy nice extension. :-)
Anyway. What works for some is no indication of that it works for all.
I'm not sure why people are so enthustiastic with bash. It's just a
shell and there are alternatives to it - which are quite nice.
Jari
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jari Aalto 2006-11-24, 7:19 pm |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:
> On Sat, 2006-11-25 at 00:02 +0200, Jari Aalto wrote:
>
> What on earth is this nonsense about multiple invocations? Do you not
> understand what shared text is?
>
> I never understood what was so wonderful about perl. Yet, Debian
> decided to make PERL Essential, so there it is. Such decisions have to
> be made.
>
> Nobody is telling you not to use the alternatives. Go ahead! Use them!
> Encourage other people to!
>
> But don't tell me that I *must* use the alternative.
I'm not sure I follow. I' puzzled why you do not seem benefit in:
- Making scripts sh-agnostict. That is making them portable
- Supporting low end systems with minimal of effort
- Improving the overall awaress of shells
What I gather so far, you have suggested that it is better to
put the shell name /bin/bash in scripts that /bin/sh. I'm not sure why
should people need to install dash if equivalent sh-implementation
woudl do the same?
Could you elaborate.
Jari
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2006-11-24, 7:19 pm |
|
> I'm not sure I follow. I' puzzled why you do not seem benefit in:
>
> - Making scripts sh-agnostict. That is making them portable
> - Supporting low end systems with minimal of effort
> - Improving the overall awaress of shells
I don't care about the "awareness" of shells, no.
If we can support low end systems with *minimal* effort, fine, but you
are asking lots of *extra* effort.
I don't care about making anything sh-agnostic. bash is just a
language; dash is just a language. We don't insist that our C programs
be C-compiler-agnostic; we don't insist that lisp or scheme programs be
dialect-agnostic; why should we insist this for shell programs?
If a maintainer wants to make a script that works with dash and posh and
busybox, they can do that too. They can even have a debconf option that
asks the user which #! line to use.
None of this requires this obsessive nattering about /bin/sh.
Thomas
| |
| Steve Langasek 2006-11-25, 1:31 am |
| On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:21:43PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> If we can support low end systems with *minimal* effort, fine, but you
> are asking lots of *extra* effort.
I think the two of you are spending far more effort *arguing* about this
than it actually takes, in practice, to keep Debian scripts invoking /bin/sh
compatible with dash. That is, after all, the point you're currently
arguing against, even though this result is already implied by policy's
current mandate for POSIX-compliant maintainer scripts when using /bin/sh as
an interpreter. Has this requirement ever cost you (or anyone) so much
development time that this thread is anything other than absurdly
disproportionate?
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2006-11-25, 1:31 am |
| On Fri, 2006-11-24 at 18:55 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:21:43PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> I think the two of you are spending far more effort *arguing* about this
> than it actually takes, in practice, to keep Debian scripts invoking /bin/sh
> compatible with dash. That is, after all, the point you're currently
> arguing against, even though this result is already implied by policy's
> current mandate for POSIX-compliant maintainer scripts when using /bin/shas
> an interpreter. Has this requirement ever cost you (or anyone) so much
> development time that this thread is anything other than absurdly
> disproportionate?
Actually, I am not arguing against the desire to make scripts compatible
with dash. That you think so indicates to me that I have been entirely
unsuccessful in getting people to believe me when I have (repeatedly)
tried to explain carefully what I *am* arguing.
I am arguing that the current policy requirement simply does not mean
what people think it means.
Thomas
| |
| Jari Aalto 2006-11-25, 7:22 am |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> writes:
>
> I don't care about the "awareness" of shells, no.
>
> If we can support low end systems with *minimal* effort, fine, but you
> are asking lots of *extra* effort.
To my knowledge, I haven't or then there is a mixup somewhere.
> I don't care about making anything sh-agnostic. bash is just a
> language; dash is just a language. We don't insist that our C programs
> be C-compiler-agnostic; we don't insist that lisp or scheme programs be
> dialect-agnostic; why should we insist this for shell programs?
I'm not the right person to explain this. I would rather compare this
to the C compiler warnings:
- I don't care. The code compiles. Right?
Or saomeone who takes another approach:
- Oh, I dind't know that there were warnings having never used -Wall
--pedantic. Give me a week and I'll fix those.
> If a maintainer wants to make a script that works with dash and posh and
> busybox, they can do that too.
>
> They can even have a debconf option that
> asks the user which #! line to use.
The point is to make things generic. Like C which can be made to
compile in multiple platforms.
> None of this requires this obsessive nattering about /bin/sh.
Obsessive? The problem is not big. I haven't encountered any breakege
by using /bin/dash instead of /bin/bash in a year. It proves that the
maintainer scripts are already in a good shape. There is no big
"converting work" needed anywhere.
What would be good is that The Policy should encourage this practise
(like many maintainers do see value in this as demonstrated in their
scripts) instead of the current wording which discourages it.
Of of the problmes in this path is the status of bash in Essential,
which implies all the rest. Fortunately many maintainers are
professionals and see things from wider sh-perspective.
Jari
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-25, 1:16 pm |
| Am 2006-11-22 20:52:07, schrieb Oleg Verych:
> On 2006-11-22, Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> Here you know what and where parameter has. Is it better to split it?
echo "${parameter}" |cut -c N-
and
echo "${parameter}" |cut -c Nx-Ny
\ /
The length is the difference
I see this as crap
>
> This one not needed, unless you are in x-terminal, AFAIK.
Why x-terminal? - I am using it in scripts
with a "dumb" terminal from "cron" or "init"
> Yes... Kind of web-programming...
:-)
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2006-11-25, 1:16 pm |
| Am 2006-11-25 00:02:34, schrieb Jari Aalto:
> PII with 62-128M, fairly common.
ACK
>
> "fast enought" is in the eye of a beholder. Try with PII/64M with
> X deskop with 20 sessions of bash open. And opening firefox and xchat.
I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #####################
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Jim Crilly 2006-11-25, 1:16 pm |
| On 11/25/06 06:06:09PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2006-11-25 00:02:34, schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
> ACK
>
>
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
> same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
>
>
You don't need 1 xterm per shell, using screen I usually have anywhere
between 10 and 20 shells going at once.
Jim.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Russ Allbery 2006-11-25, 7:24 pm |
| Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> writes:
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the same
> time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
I have a minimum of 18 xterms open at any given time, plus an additional
four shells running under screen, in just my standard desktop
configuration which I've been using for many years.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jari Aalto 2006-11-25, 7:24 pm |
| Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@freenet.de> writes:
> Am 2006-11-25 00:02:34, schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
> ACK
>
>
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
> same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
Try developing 10 software packages simultaneously (you leave the
session open and come back next day) possibly in different sites
(compiling ,aking manual, html pages, writng docs). Include piece of
version control tools and editors and you find you need *lots* of
rooms to play in.
And that is only a start.
Jari
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Stephen Gran 2006-11-26, 1:30 am |
| This one time, at band camp, Michelle Konzack said:
> Am 2006-11-25 00:02:34, schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
> ACK
>
>
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
> same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
My normal work day involves between 50 and 60 xterms, and another dozen
or two konsole sessions, spread across 16 virtual desktops.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : sgran@debian.org |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Dwayne C. Litzenberger 2006-11-26, 1:30 am |
| On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0000, Oleg Verych wrote:
>Guys. Once more. Spaces is your problem, not my.
In Unix, every byte except NUL and / (including CR, LF, quotes, and UTF-8
characters) can be used in a filename, and every string of those bytes
except "." and ".." is a perfectly valid, legal filename.
Treating some legal filenames differently than others is a bug. Period.
--
Dwayne C. Litzenberger <dlitz@dlitz.net>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Hendrik Sattler 2006-11-26, 1:30 am |
| Am Samstag 25 November 2006 22:57 schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
> Try developing 10 software packages simultaneously (you leave the
> session open and come back next day) possibly in different sites
> (compiling ,aking manual, html pages, writng docs). Include piece of
> version control tools and editors and you find you need *lots* of
> rooms to play in.
>
> And that is only a start.
That what IDEs are for. Or try emacs ;)
And if you develop that much, I really hope for you that you have a bit more
computing power and RAM than the low profile. With today prices on hardware,
everything else is pretty inefficient.
HS
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Brett Parker 2006-11-26, 1:17 pm |
| On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 06:06:09PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2006-11-25 00:02:34, schrieb Jari Aalto:
>
> ACK
>
>
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
> same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
Just looking around my desktop I spy 12 xterms open, and this is from a
fairly recent cleanup. I dare say my workstation at work has somewhere
in the region of 40 running xterms at the moment... all running bash.
It's not that uncommon ;)
--
Brett Parker
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| David Weinehall 2006-11-26, 7:19 pm |
| On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 02:21:43PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
[snip]
> I don't care about making anything sh-agnostic. bash is just a
> language; dash is just a language. We don't insist that our C programs
> be C-compiler-agnostic; we don't insist that lisp or scheme programs be
> dialect-agnostic; why should we insist this for shell programs?
Well, code that only compiles using, for instance, gcc v2.95, is frowned
upon. And the fact that we need to lug around automake1.4, 1.7, 1.8,
and 1.9 is scary (but if I understand things correctly, some of that
comes down to bad software design on the automake side rather than bad
makefiles).
[snip]
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Anthony DeRobertis 2006-11-26, 7:19 pm |
| Michelle Konzack wrote:
>
> I do not know a singel person which open 20 xterms with bash at the
> same time. On my IBM i have normaly 4-6 XTerms open, mozilla and gaim.
>
That's nice. ps/grep/wc shows I have 27 xterms, all with bash running,
open at the moment. Of course, I have far more than a PII w/ 64M of RAM.
And, of course, iceweasel uses more memory than all the xterms and
bashes combined. Oddly enough, gaim is even bigger(!)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Gunnar Wolf 2006-11-27, 1:30 am |
| Dwayne C. Litzenberger dijo [Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 11:30:40PM -0600]:
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 07:42:14PM +0000, Oleg Verych wrote:
>
> In Unix, every byte except NUL and / (including CR, LF, quotes, and UTF-8
> characters) can be used in a filename, and every string of those bytes
> except "." and ".." is a perfectly valid, legal filename.
>
> Treating some legal filenames differently than others is a bug. Period.
Actually, '.' and '..' are completely valid and legal filenames, and
quite popular, in fact. Of course, they have a very special meaning,
you should not just touch them... But they are as valid as any other.
Greetings,
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|