Joerg Schilling wrote:
[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.
Jorg, if the actual differences between ksh88 and ksh93 could be
documented (not by source, but by impact) then there would be nothing to
stop anyone taking the ksh93 source and implementing a compatability
mode based on how it was called. If you have a description of the
differences, you don't need the older sources.
alan.
--
Alan Hargreaves Senior Technical Support Specialist
Phone : +61 2 9844 5379 Kernel/VOSJEC/Performance Engineer
Mobile : +61 416 207 573 Product Technical Support (APAC)
Fax : +61 2 9844 5311 Sun Microsystems
http://blogs.sun.com/tpenta 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon NSW 2072
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5,(41*2),sqrt(7056),(unpack(c,H)-2),oct(115),10);'
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
