On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Matthew Soffen wrote:

> Afternoon All,
>
> For *BSD it would be an additional package that is required (and would
> need to be tested for during the ConfigureMe step).

Thanks, Matt.

So it sounds as though we can safely assume that 'bash' is reasonably
easily available for all our current platforms (either already there (e.g.
Linux) or available as a distributed package-like entity).

We might want to have a quick test in "configure.in".  (We already have
analogous tests, (e.g. libnet, uuid) which can warn or fail as
appropriate.)

In the packaging aspects, we (individuals amongst us here) will probably
want to add 'bash' to any pre-requisite list in our mechanisms.

And finally, we need to ensure that scripts with bash features say
"!/bin/bash" (not "!/bin/sh").


Does that sound OK, Lars?  (Thanks for pushing us on this one!)


-- 

:  David Lee                                I.T. Service          :
:  Senior Systems Programmer                Computer Centre       :
:  UNIX Team Leader                         Durham University     :
:                                           South Road            :
:  http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.d.lee/            Durham DH1 3LE        :
:  Phone: +44 191 334 2752                  U.K.                  :
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to