Gerfried Fuchs <[email protected]> writes: > Ah, now I see the difference. Though, I'd like to challenge the > explenation:
> This is fine for normal operation, but if the script is run by > hand with "sh /path/to/script" (common in debugging), "-e" > will not be in effect. It's therefore better to use "set -e" in > the body of the script. > This explenation assumes that all scripts are posix compliant shell > scripts - which they don't have to be. They can be bash scripts or perl > scripts too. Given that one *has* to check what type of script it is > (like, head -1 script) it is directly visible from there that -e is set. Hm, well, for maintainer scripts, I usually just use sh script, since nearly all of them are POSIX. But the same thing would apply if one routinely ran bash script. I don't recall ever running head -1 to see what type of script it is unless that blew up. (We do have some Perl scripts, but they're fairly rare.) The problem that Lintian is recommending to avoid is that since set -e changes the behavior in some fundamental ways, it can happen that running sh script will "work" when running the script directly doesn't, which is very confusing. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
