On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I don't understand why ksh88 would be needed in a *new* distribution. >> ksh88 is buggy and the Solaris derivate is not compatible to the >> original ksh88i from David Korn nor the ksh88 versions on AIX or >> HP/UX. All newer operating systems like Linux, SCO or AIX6 switched by >> ksh93 as /bin/ksh. >> In my opinion it does not make sense to retain ksh88 as /bin/ksh in Indiana. > > Actually, the issue with ksh88 is moot - it cannot be included in > Indiana if that distribution is meant to be redistributable. In that > case, ksh93 seems to be the logical choice as a replacement. > > That said, there is still work that needs to be done (once ksh93 has > actually integrated into OpenSolaris) for it to actually replace the > current /usr/bin/ksh. Until that work has been done and been approved > by the ARC, this replacement will not take place in the ON source > base.
That concept is important, and too easily overlooked I think. Namely, that everything desired for Indiana (the new binary distro) still must eventually meet the requirements of an ARC review (and of course most things don't w/out additional work.) David -- A while back you mentioned the possibility of maybe coming up with a way to mitigate this constraint, so things could somehow make their way into a binary distro release (October?) even *prior* to being ARC reviewed... Perhaps this is a case-in-point? That is, this desire to make ksh93 replace /usr/bin/ksh might be an example of a good use of that process? Eric _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
