[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: loadables/rm not POSIX compliant

From: Tim Rühsen
Subject: Re: loadables/rm not POSIX compliant
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 13:16:19 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0

On 5/29/19 12:53 PM, Tim Rühsen wrote:
> On 5/28/19 6:04 PM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>> At 2019-05-28T17:01:52+0200, Tim Rühsen wrote:
>>> Since distributions like Debian doesn't deliver binaries from
>>> examples/,
>> That doesn't sound accurate to me.  The Debian Policy Manual, §12.6,
>> encourages the shipping of examples:
>> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#examples
>> In fact, the bash-doc package contains dozens of examples.  However, I
>> don't see anything named "rm".  (I'm looking at bash-doc 5.0-4 in Debian
>> 10, "buster".)
> That package does not contain examples/loadables. But there is a package
> 'bash-builtins' which doesn't contain 'rm' and 'cat' either.
> Opening a new bug report via 'reportbug' seems to trigger another Debian
> bug. You can see the bug entry at
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?dist=unstable;package=bash-builtins
> (#929702), but clicking on it gives "There is no record of Bug #929702".

The link now works
(https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929702). It took a
while, I was too impatient.

Regards, Tim

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]