On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:09 PM, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 10:57 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote: >> On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 14:46 -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> > When the shebang is to allow running some sort of unittest I generally just >> > leave it alone (the end user won't want to run it and upstream does want to >> > run the code when they're testing). >> >> There is still no reason to have a shebang on a non-executable file. >> The file must have started out executable in order for upstream to run >> it. The proper solution would be to remove the shebang in the same >> place the executability gets removed. > > another option is to not flag things which impact NOT AT ALL > functionality :) Indeed. Only warn about non-executable shebang scripts in $PATH (or non-executable anything in $PATH); otherwise it's just a comment that me be useful elsewhere for test purposes. -- Iain. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
