Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote: > >> >> There are, of course, many issues with the compatibility of the > >> >> builtins and the Solaris versions; e.g., chmod has grown a number > >> >> of new options relating to ACLs recently. > >> > > >> >Which options do you mean? IMO it would be a good thing when the > >> >manual pages themselves reflect such changes, e.g. in which release an > >> >option was added, removed or changed. > >> > >> chmod [-fR] acl_operation file... > >> > >> This was added in Nevada with zfs. > > > >Can we contribute that code back to the ksh93 people ? usr/cmd/chmod/ > >carries a AT&T copyright so I hope that exchanging code between both > >projects (Solaris vs, ast/ksh93) can be done without asking the Sun > >lawyers for each single line... or not ? > > Well, considering that you wrote the code, I'm sure you can give it > to whoever you want.
Erm... I am very sure I didn't write the new ACL code http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/cmd/chmod/ (unless I am suffering from some kind of sleepwalking... or better: sleep-programming (Ok... I am sure I am often close to that point at 5AM... but I usually still remember what I wrote... :-) )) ... my question was more whether Sun-written code can be exported (e.g. cut&paste hacking) to ast/ksh93 under the original AT&T Unix license (http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/on/usr/src/cmd/chmod/chmod.c carries it). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
