| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 07:30:00AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I don't think you should really expect anything, it's just that we |
| 4 |
> have no intrested in breaking peoples networking... Personally I'm |
| 5 |
> worried about users with alternative /bin/sh symlinks, pointing |
| 6 |
> to something else than bash, like to dash, but that worry could be |
| 7 |
> misguided too. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
That sounds worrisome. There's no such animal as "sh" anymore, just a |
| 10 |
symlink to whatever. Wouldn't it make sense to explicitly specify |
| 11 |
"#!/bin/bash", rather than "#!/bin/sh" and hope+pray that /bin/sh |
| 12 |
symlinks to something bash-compatable? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Or if bash is too heavyweight, howsabout explicitly specifying |
| 15 |
"#!/bin/busybox ash" and making sure that scripts run properly under it? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> |
| 19 |
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications |
Archives