>On 7/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >I suggest to make /bin/ksh ksh93 from the beginning that you don't >> >have to deal with any backwards compatibility fuzz later >> >> If you want PowerPC Solaris and SPARC/x86 Solaris be that different, >> then yes; if you want scripts to be compatible I suggest not. > >Why not? ksh93 is mostly backwards compatible to Solaris ksh
Because it's stupid to have random differences between "Solaris PPC", "Solaris x86" and "Solaris SPARC".[1] We strongly believe in "One Solaris"; making the build tree distinguish between the different flavours and install a different application as /bin/ksh. (And, of course, the operative word is "mostly") "This ksh script works on PPC but not on x86/SPARC, how come" >PS: Somehow I have the feeling that Sun doesn't want to see the >project succeed in replacing ksh88 with ksh93, a feeling which is >based on the open hostilities from Sun personnel and the permanent >delays :( No, that's not true at all. I and other have wanted ksh93 in Solaris for a long time, provided it is done properly. The argument is about "properly"; you should not read anything more into it than that. Casper [1] Well, considering that /bin/ksh is for some reason not part of the Unix license we once bought and therefor in usr/closed, the PowerPC team may not have a choice but to install ksh93 as /bin/ksh _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
