"Adam D. Barratt" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue, May 4, 2010 18:51, Jari Aalto wrote:
>
>> This message:
>>
>> P: xtrlock: maintainer-script-without-set-e postinst
>>
>> Compare the file content:
>>
>> $ nl -ba debian/postinst
>> 1 #!/bin/sh -e
>
> This is in fact exactly the style of code that the tag is trying to
> persuade you /not/ to write. The full description of the tag is:
>
> The maintainer script passes -e to the shell on the #! line rather than
> using set -e in the body of the script. 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.
I see, thanks[*]. But, could you consider changing the tag:
maintainer-script-without-set-e
to, something:
maintainer-script-without-or-dangerous-set-e
Because the plain "without" is a little spartan in this case,
Jari
[*] The example was from the NMUd package.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
