On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 12:06:35PM -0400, Chris AtLee wrote: > > > In any event, I looked at the shorewall-lite package you prepared. This > > particular matter is one that is being dealt with upstream. The 4.0 > > branch of shorewall is a stable release. The diff to fix every > > occurrence of bashisms is 2743 lines. That is a huge diff for something > > that is a stable release. In the next upload of the packages, I intend > > to simply replace /bin/sh with /bin/dash and then depend upon dash. > > > > Regards, > > > > -Roberto > > Will replacing /bin/sh with /bin/dash really fix the problems though? > I suppose it will cause shorewall to break if a non-portable bashism > is used. How would this interact with SHOREWALL_SHELL in > shorewall.conf? > In practice it doesn't matter. Shorewall works as is with both dash (the default on Ubuntu for some time now) and also with BusyBox (which is used by super small router distros). So, this all just an exercise in POSIX pedantry. The only shell which would break with shorewall as it is now written would be posh. Of course, nobody uses it as a real shell. For the time being, I have patched offending files to use /bin/dash. A couple of months ago I committed a change to the upstream repository which makes the change to the local declarations to make them POSIX-compliant.
Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
