Felix Schulte wrote: > On 8/23/06, Dan Price <dp at eng.sun.com> wrote: > > I've been following this project, although I just joined the > > mailing list. > > > > I have a couple of questions regarding the shape of the > > project: > > > > - What is the nature of the replacing of libcmd.so? If I'm > > not mistaken, I noticed that the existing libcmd.so is > > being overwritten by the tarball which was recently > > published. I wondered why that would be. > All the functions in Solaris libcmd.so have been ported over to the > ksh93 libcmd.so which will replace the Solaris version
Ugh... that's totally WRONG. We had the debate whether it is usefull to sync both source trees 1:1, including the addition of the |def*()| functions to ksh93's libcmd to make it 100% compatible to the Solaris version - but that was only a theoretical debate right now (we're waiting for the lawyers to check whether we can contribute CDDL code under the AT&T ksh93/AST license - and after that point we MAY debate that. But that's somewhere at the bottom of my priority list). > > - Which consolidation is this project targetting? I > > understand that ksh93 has its own build system, and > > I was wondering which consolidation would best accomodate > > that uniqueness. > ksh93 is integrated into the Opensolaris consolidation We're targeting OS/Net since "/sbin/sh" and "/usr/bin/csh" live there, the old "/usr/bin/ksh" lived there and we need libshell.so and libast.so for OS/Net-specific parts in the future. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
