* changing /bin/sh would break compatibility; doing this without fully understanding the consequences would be irresponsible.
* AFAIK, POSIX only requires that the POSIX shell be found as "sh" when PATH is set to the value returned by getconf PATH; it does not require a fixed pathname for the POSIX shell, thus, interpreter execs (#!) cannot be written to guarantee that they will use the POSIX shell; if that's what you want, you'd have to find some other way to do it I'm not aware that the prior discussion precludes _eventually_ switching /bin/sh to a POSIX shell. But it does seem to lay out some things to do before even considering that, like getting ksh93 to work in a way that doesn't create new problems (compatibility between new builtins and previously existing external commands, for instance), _considering_ the replacement of /bin/ksh and/or /usr/xpg4/bin/sh with ksh93, etc. However much of a problem not having /bin/sh be a POSIX shell creates for you and many others, it's reasonable to believe that making the change would cause _some_ problem for _someone_, too. And given that commercial vendors tend to follow a Hippocratic principle "first, do no harm", it's probably just responsible for them to at least try to _understand_ the consequences (both good and bad) and their scope, before making the change. Maybe it does some good to periodically remind folks that there would be some benefits of making the change. But it's not as if anyone is unaware of that; they're just looking at other concerns as well. So don't be surprised if repetitious complaints are regarded by many as little more than trolling. This message posted from opensolaris.org
