Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 12:27:32PM +0100, Pavel Tsekov wrote: >> 4. I see that the binary package includes /usr/bin/ksh.exe. It may be >> better to renamed this to /usr/bin/pdksh.exe, just in case someone >> packages AT&T's ksh for Cygwin. > > Hmm, I disagree. pdksh should be used as a ksh substitute and I'd > expect to run my scripts w/o having to change the shebang line to be > `#!/bin/pdksh' for all my ksh scripts. > > However, this is just *my* opinion.
And, based on the messages when AT&T ksh was possibly going to be packaged for Cygwin, it was a big job. (Multiple support packages required). So, we should get sufficient warning to avoid the problem, *if* it ever occurs. Max.