Your message dated Sat, 26 Apr 2008 14:19:16 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Re: Bug#478016: shorewall-common: please depend on 'bash | 
dash' instead of 'dash'
has caused the Debian Bug report #478016,
regarding shorewall-common: please depend on 'bash | dash' instead of 'dash'
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
immediately.)


-- 
478016: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=478016
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: shorewall-common
Version: 4.0.10-1
Severity: minor

shorewall-common and shorewall-shell both depend on dash because of bashisms in 
scripts.

dash is not installed on my system. I use bash. With my understanding of the 
problem, bash would work well with shorewall.
Or I'm missing something else.

Please make shorewall-* packages depend on 'bash | dash'.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.24 (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) (ignored: 
LC_ALL set to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

Versions of packages shorewall-common depends on:
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]         1.5.21     Debian configuration management sy
ii  iproute                       20080108-1 Professional tools to control the 
ii  iptables                      1.4.0-3    administration tools for packet fi

shorewall-common recommends no packages.

-- debconf information:
  shorewall-common/major_release:
  shorewall-common/dont_restart:



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 12:14:29PM +0200, Kevin Baradon wrote:
> Package: shorewall-common
> Version: 4.0.10-1
> Severity: minor
> 
> shorewall-common and shorewall-shell both depend on dash because of bashisms 
> in scripts.
> 
> dash is not installed on my system. I use bash. With my understanding of the 
> problem, bash would work well with shorewall.
> Or I'm missing something else.
> 
> Please make shorewall-* packages depend on 'bash | dash'.
> 
> 
If you look at #468698 and #468699, you will find that the bashisms are
in fact quite pedantic.  The problem is that while all the affected
files work properly with /bin/sh as bash, I had to either change all the
files to not have bashisms (which was something like a 3000-4000 line
change and not suitable for a stable branch of Shorewall) or change the
interpreter specs to use /bin/dash.  The problem with the latter
solution is that now dash is required.  If I set 'bash | dash' then you
could install shorewall without also installing dash.  However, without
dash present, you would get something like this:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat test
#!/bin/baz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ./test
bash: ./test: /bin/baz: bad interpreter: No such file or directory

In particular, the lack of dash would cause shorewall to quit working.
So, I really don't have another option.  If you prefer, you can download
the source package and rebuild the package without the sh -> dash patch
and without the dependency on dash.  There are instructions on how to
rebuild a customized Debian package on my personal website if you need
help with that.

Another thing to consider is that it is a release goal to change the
default sh from bash to dash for Lenny.  If this happens, basically
every one will have dash installed regardless.

In any event, several weeks ago (or maybe a couple of months now) I
applied the whole 3000-4000 line patch to the upstream trunk of
shorewall.  Once shorewall 4.2 is released, dash will no longer be a
requirement (on Debian that is) since the shell command language used
will be entirely POSIX compliant.

That said, I am closing this bug.

Regards,

-Roberto
-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---

Reply via email to