On Nov 3 19:31, Achim Gratz wrote: > Brian Inglis writes: > > Suggest that I could come up with a package grep-nowarn which can only > > suppress the [ef]grep warnings, where the package would install > > [ef]grep-nowarn, and the postinstall script could rename the > > distributed shell scripts to [ef]grep-warn, and install alternatives > > with -warn priority 10, -nowarn priority 20; preremove would reverse > > the process. > > > > Suggestions to accommodate -nowarn from grep package postinstall? > > I could supply the same postinstall and preremove as -nowarn to check > > for -nowarn and install or uninstall the alternative. > > > > Sequence or timing issues to watch out for during postinstall/preremove? > > As Corinna already said, why GNU suddenly cares so much about strict > POSIX conformance in this case is puzzling. If anything they should > have left the decision to packagers and IMNHO the warning should only be > presented when POSIXLY_CORRECT is set in the environment, if at all. > The patch to the wrapper script(s) in question is trivial and several > Linux distributions have removed the warning already (if you do this, > also change the interpreter from bash to dash). Just skip any > extra packages and do the same.
+1 Corinna
