[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Absolutely; but if we can replace /bin/ksh with a dual mode binary which
> can do both.
If the license issues did not change, this would still be a decision that
is not useful for OpenSolaris as there would be no source for ksh88.
> >If there is a serious compatibility issue, then Solaris can replace
> >the new executables with ones that are 100% backwards-compatible.
> >There is no reason for OpenSolaris to be so hobbled.
>
> Depends on whether OpenSolaris sees 100% (backward) compatibility as a
> constraint or just a goal.
Backward compatibility is important, but having the source is more important.
If we like to discuss compatibility issues, please give us a list of deviations
to ksh93. And please note that a OpenSolaris PPC port has no chance at all to
include ksh88.
So let us just use the motto: Provide backwards compatibility where it is
possible. With ksh, it does not seem to be possible.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
