On Jun 22 07:19, Eric Blake wrote: > One other issue is that unless ash is updated simultaneously with bash, I > see potential problems with users losing /bin/sh altogether: bash-3.0-3 > overwrites /bin/sh with bash, then uninstalling ash (or upgrading to a new > ash that no longer has /bin/sh) will delete /bin/sh because the old > version had it, without realizing that it is not ash that is getting > deleted. So we definitely need a new ash package, and it is now a > question of whether it should bundle a shell as /bin/ash or just be empty > (as an end-of-life for ash as maintained by cygwin). Furthermore, all > other packages that depend on ash because they use /bin/sh will need to > update their dependencies to be on bash. Fortunately, ash comes before > bash in the alphabet, so a simultaneous upgrade to a new ash and bash > should still end up with a working /bin/sh.
What about something along these lines: - ash only provides /bin/ash.exe - bash provides /bin/bash.exe and sh.exe (linked or copied) - ash gets a dependency to bash. - *Both* packages get postinstall #!/bin/bash scripts which copy bin/bash to /bin/sh. Would that help? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:[email protected] Red Hat, Inc.
