On Mon, 22 Mar 1999, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Should there be a standard place to put script interpreters (e.g. perl, > > tcl, python)? There is a thread on the kernel mailing list about a patch > > to support putting things like: > > > > #!perl > > > > instead of the full path to perl in scripts, but it really shouldn't be > > handled in the kernel. Perhaps something should be specified like: > > Exactly what problem is someone trying to solve? There is no problem.
The guy who posted it was trying to make broken scripts run. > Handling this in the kernel is stupid. Worse, it will only work if > your script is running you have one platform. Which is what I told him. > There is a standard place (for perl, sh, csh, etc.) specified by both > FSSTND 1.2 and FHS 2.0. perl is /usr/bin/perl. I wasn't aware of this. I guess I should RTFM a little more closely next time. ;) > > If the script interpreter foo is provided, the location of the interpreter > > will be /usr/bin/foo. > > That's about how it's phrased. > > > Or something similar, so that scripts that depend on an interpreter not > > part of the base, there is still a standard place for it. > > We don't want to extend the base, so FHS is the place to keep the > definition. > > - Dan > +-----------------------+-----------------------------+--------------------+ | Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | NoDomainName Networks | http://www.nodomainname.net | http://www.ndn.net | | AtDot E-mail Services | http://www.atdot.org +--------------------+ +-----------------------+-----------------------------+ whois jkk12 | | Thanks to advances in shortness, I have updated my +--------------------+ | ~/.signature. Note that nodomainname can now be replaced with just ndn. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
