On Fri, 4 Jan 2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
I rebuilt all packages in Debian, first with bash as /bin/sh, then with dash as /bin/sh. Your package builds fine in both cases. However, the resulting packages are diferent according to debdiff!
The actual problem was caused by bashisms in the upstream installer script which is fixed in the new upstream version which was just uploaded (well, I'm also upstream ;-)). While I regard the bug as fixed with the latest upload I wonder whether the two explicite usages of /bin/bash in postinst / prerm are a problem: Quoting http://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2008/01/03.dash-different/dash/fortunes-de_0.23-1_sid32.buildlog size 1068538 bytes: control archive= 5877 bytes. 592 bytes, 22 lines * config #!/bin/sh 446 bytes, 12 lines control 7799 bytes, 107 lines md5sums 2200 bytes, 116 lines * postinst #!/bin/bash 206 bytes, 8 lines * postrm #!/bin/sh 459 bytes, 15 lines * preinst #!/bin/sh 1238 bytes, 67 lines * prerm #!/bin/bash 2078 bytes, 29 lines templates I verified that /bin/bash is really needed and found that these scripts are using a feature that dash does not seem to know. So if bash should really be avoided a heavy rewrite of the scripts would be needed. What do you think about this? Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
