Re: [Nmh-workers] First release candidate of nmh 1.6 now available

[Paul Fox]

earl wrote:
 > part       text/plain                 896
 > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Ken Hornstein wrote:
 > 
 > > I have mixed feelings about this; I think /bin/bash is wrong, but I thought
 > > that /bin/sh should actually work everywhere.  I know perl is all over
 > > the place, but I thought /usr/bin/perl was pretty standard.  What do
 > > others think?
 > 
 > /bin/sh should be used for shell scripts, and any scripts should avoid
 > anything that only Bash supports.

these are contrib scripts we're discussing -- not things installed
to the filesystem as part of MH proper.  seems to me that if someone's
trying to run something from contrib, it's not too big a stretch
that they might have to customize it for their environment, however
slightly.

but if the /usr/bin/env trick is "normal", and safe, it's fine with me.

paul

 > 
 > As for perl, /usr/bin/perl is fairly standard if Perl is installed, so I
 > see no problem leaving it that way.  However, the following could be
 > used if you want to make perl scripts more flexible:
 > 
 >   #!/usr/bin/env perl
 > 
 > The only real downside to this is if scripts can be run as root.  Using
 > env method could be a potential vulnerability.
 > 
 > --ewh
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > Nmh-workers mailing list
 > address@hidden
 > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

----------------------
 paul fox, address@hidden (arlington, ma, where it's 55.9 degrees)