I concur that this is an automatic approval case. In fact, you probably
could have just done it as an update to 2008/094 directly.
That said, out of curiosity, where do the implementations differ such
that ksh93's version can't stand as a replacement?
-- Garrett
Don Cragun wrote:
> I am sponsoring this case for Roland Mainz (an OpenSolaris contributor)
> and April Chin (acting as sponsor for this work).
>
> I believe it qualifies for closed approved automatic status. If a
> PSARC member disagrees, let me know and I will upgrade it to a
> fast-track case.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don
>
> Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase %I% %G% SMI
> This information is Copyright 2008 Sun Microsystems
> 1. Introduction
> 1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
> Remove /usr/bin/printf from PSARC case 2008 094
> 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier:
> Author: Donald Cragun
> 1.3 Date of This Document:
> 17 September, 2008
> 4. Technical Description
>
> This case updates PSARC/2008/094 (ksh93 Update 1).
>
> While implementing PSARC/2008/094, which (among other things) planned
> to replace /usr/bin/printf with a link to the AT&T AST printf, the
> project team found some irregularities in standards conformance in both
> the default printf() function in libc and in the behavior of
> /usr/bin/printf.
>
> Since some of these issues may involve official interpretation requests
> against the POSIX Standards and the Single UNIX Specifications, they
> may take a long time to resolve. Therefore, this case removes the
> changes to /usr/bin/printf that were documented in PSARC/2008/094 from
> the deliverables provided by that case so PSARC/2008/094 changes can
> be integrated in a timely manner.
>
> Since the current /usr/bin/printf will not be changed by this case,
> there are no backwards compatibility issues.
>
> 6. Resources and Schedule
> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information
> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name:
> ON
> 6.5. ARC review type: Automatic
> 6.6. ARC Exposure: open
>
>
