Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Test: grep 3.8 - promotion to current stable

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

On Nov  3 19:31, Achim Gratz wrote:
> Brian Inglis writes:
> > Suggest that I could come up with a package grep-nowarn which can only
> > suppress the [ef]grep warnings, where the package would install
> > [ef]grep-nowarn, and the postinstall script could rename the
> > distributed shell scripts to [ef]grep-warn, and install alternatives
> > with -warn priority 10, -nowarn priority 20; preremove would reverse
> > the process.
> >
> > Suggestions to accommodate -nowarn from grep package postinstall?
> > I could supply the same postinstall and preremove as -nowarn to check
> > for -nowarn and install or uninstall the alternative.
> >
> > Sequence or timing issues to watch out for during postinstall/preremove?
> 
> As Corinna already said, why GNU suddenly cares so much about strict
> POSIX conformance in this case is puzzling.  If anything they should
> have left the decision to packagers and IMNHO the warning should only be
> presented when POSIXLY_CORRECT is set in the environment, if at all.
> The patch to the wrapper script(s) in question is trivial and several
> Linux distributions have removed the warning already (if you do this,
> also change the interpreter from bash to dash).  Just skip any
> extra packages and do the same.

+1


Corinna