Thorsten Glaser writes ("Re: bash exorcism experiment ('bug' 762923 & 763012)"):
> I’d rather prefer to see this resolved by getting #428189 fixed.Clearly you would, but #428189 (moving coreutils printf to /bin) was also implicitly rejected by the TC in its decision on #539158. The question of whether to move printf to /bin was raised in that conversation, and rejected: As Andreas wrote here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=539158#15 | If one of the members of the tech ctte considers that we should | either overwrite the udev-maintainer or move printf to /bin, we | should draft another resolution text for that. > Fixing #428189 would avoid pulling printf into the list of builtins > and not violate the #539158 decision. So I think #428189 ought to be closed. If you disagree about the meaning of the TC decision in #539158 then the TC should clarify it. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/21567.45486.215252.540...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
