bash: should be an ALTERNATIVES for /bin/sh?
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
stale
- Dominant language
- Makefile
- Stars
- 4.6k
- Forks
- 4k
- Avg merge
- 3d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 134
Description
Maintainer: @Naoir
Environment: All
Description:
Should bash be a higher priority alternative (using ALTERNATIVES) for /bin/sh?
Is there some way that it's incompatible with busybox's /bin/sh applet? I would think it should be a fully compatible superset of busybox's /bin/sh functionality.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by examining how ALTERNATIVES selects /bin/sh and how the busybox /bin/sh applet is registered. Compare bash and busybox sh compatibility for the shell behavior OpenWrt packages rely on. Done means determining whether bash can safely receive higher priority and documenting or implementing the required package change.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- bash
- Domain
- operating-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100