Ok, thanks for this info.
The sleep builtin seems like something we should include in ksh93, then,
and I don't see any behavior in the builtin sleep which is incompatible
with the Solaris sleep binary.
So besides "sleep", the other ksh93 builtins that are not Solaris ksh
builtins (and not Solaris binaries) are getconf and printf.
Are there dependencies on these being ksh93 builtins?
And there are the builtins from libcmd, which are not available
by default, but seem to be activated via "builtin <command name>"
although I am able to activate only a subset in ksh93:
basename
cat
chmod
cmp
cut
dirname
head
logname
mkdir
uname
wc
Would ksh93 users need to have these builtins available?
Thanks,
April
> X-Sasl-enc: eHyRBneg7GKTp+Nu7hdjtIbatAdkZBvM7rN0EBuHD4An 1143104052
> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 09:54:17 +0100
> From: Henk Langeveld <hlangeveld at mailworks.org>
> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
> X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: April Chin <April.Chin at eng.sun.com>, Korn Shell 93
> integration/migration
project discussion <ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org>
> Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] OpenSolaris /usr/bin/ksh (builtins)
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> April Chin wrote:
> > On a related note regarding the builtins in ksh93...
> > I think we want to integrate ksh93 without the builtins
> > which have Solaris binaries but are not Solaris ksh builtins, at least
> > not initially. Will ksh93 users be depending on builtins for getconf,
> > printf, sleep, etc. in Solaris?
>
> One specific issue with sleep is its granularity.
> With ksh93 I expect sleep to support sub-second resolution.
> It's one of the reasons for chosing ksh93.
>
> Regards,
> Henk
