Dale Ghent wrote: > On Feb 4, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Peter Memishian wrote: > >>> It's fine to make use of the ksh builtin support for various > >>> commands, but > >>> can we please learn from the problems that occurred when we > >>> changed sleep > >>> to be a builtin recently (e.g. 6793120) and instead create trivial > >>> wrapper > >>> *programs* that access the builtin functionality through libshell? > >> > >> I already have a fix (tested and queued for my sponsor) for CR > >> #6793120 > >> which does something similar as you've proposed... > > > > So there is a unique pid for each program and thus it can still be > > pkill'd? > > If so, and if this fix involves wrappers, Wouldn't we have lost the > "no fork/exec" advantage of having shell builtins in the first place, > right?
Erm... no. The wrapper is there to fill the matching filesystem entry (for example /usr/bin/chicken). If the shell is already running and the "chicken" command should be executed the shell will walk the PATH elements and search for the first filesystem entry which matches this name. If a builtin "chicken" is bound to /usr/bin/ it will be executed instead of the /usr/bin/chicken command in the filesystem if the PATH search reaches /usr/bin/. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;)
