On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 2:58 AM, Jim Klimov <jimkli...@cos.ru> wrote: > >On Mon, 3 Nov 2014, Bruce Lilly wrote: > >> > >> As of this late date, /usr/bin/bash here is in fact the bash > >executable, > >> not a link; but that means that it's 32-bit only and might well > [...] > So most of the programs (thousands of binaries supplied with a sol10 > distro and extension discs) remained 32-bit only. A minority of the > lrograms that were deemed to really need this (under 700? or even 100?) > were dual-built and provided with the isaexec hack to pick the right binary > at run-time depending on the running kernel (32/64).
One more note applicable to bash before I start a separate thread regarding 32-bit vs. 64 bit issues that aren't bash-specific: # ls /bin/amd64/*sh /*/bin/amd64/*sh /*/*/bin/amd64/*sh | egrep -v "lish|ush|mash|rash|\.sh|ssh" /bin/amd64/bash /bin/amd64/ksh /bin/amd64/rbash /bin/amd64/rksh /bin/amd64/tclsh /bin/amd64/tcsh /bin/amd64/wish /bin/amd64/zoomsh /usr/bin/amd64/bash /usr/bin/amd64/ksh /usr/bin/amd64/rbash /usr/bin/amd64/rksh /usr/bin/amd64/tclsh /usr/bin/amd64/tcsh /usr/bin/amd64/wish /usr/bin/amd64/zoomsh /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/bash /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/ksh /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/rbash /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/rksh /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/tclsh /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/tcsh /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/wish /usr/openwin/bin/amd64/zoomsh /usr/X/bin/amd64/bash /usr/X/bin/amd64/ksh /usr/X/bin/amd64/rbash /usr/X/bin/amd64/rksh /usr/X/bin/amd64/tclsh /usr/X/bin/amd64/tcsh /usr/X/bin/amd64/wish /usr/X/bin/amd64/zoomsh /usr/X11/bin/amd64/bash /usr/X11/bin/amd64/ksh /usr/X11/bin/amd64/rbash /usr/X11/bin/amd64/rksh /usr/X11/bin/amd64/tclsh /usr/X11/bin/amd64/tcsh /usr/X11/bin/amd64/wish /usr/X11/bin/amd64/zoomsh /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/bash /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/ksh /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/rbash /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/rksh /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/tclsh /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/tcsh /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/wish /usr/X11R6/bin/amd64/zoomsh Evidently there are quite a few shells -- N.B. including bash -- where the packagers seem to have decided there were issues warranting building and packaging 64-bit versions. I'll let somebody else figure out exactly why the recent updated version of /usr/bin/bash trampled on the isaexec pointing to separate 32- and 64-bit versions; I don't really care much about bash per se as I don't use it (for reasons having to do with familiarity, usability, portability, and reliability; before "shellshock" added security to that list). _______________________________________________ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss