Martijn Dekker wrote:
> Op 18-06-20 om 14:11 schreef Joerg Schilling:
> > Is my impression correct that you did not use the modifications from Redhat
> > people that introduced non-portability, many bugs and a slowdown?
>
> Yes.
This is really good news.
> I don't know much about malloc, but wh
Op 18-06-20 om 14:11 schreef Joerg Schilling:
Is my impression correct that you did not use the modifications from Redhat
people that introduced non-portability, many bugs and a slowdown?
Yes.
Be careful when looking at changes from these people, since they e.g. did
throw away the ksh93 speci
Martijn Dekker wrote:
> Op 16-06-20 om 17:37 schreef Alan Coopersmith:
> > We are maintaining ksh93 packages, but not doing active development work on
> > them. Our packages are still based on the last stable release from AT&T -
> > 2012-08-01 with an unfortunately high number of local patches a
Op 16-06-20 om 17:37 schreef Alan Coopersmith:
We are maintaining ksh93 packages, but not doing active development work on
them. Our packages are still based on the last stable release from AT&T -
2012-08-01 with an unfortunately high number of local patches applied:
https://github.com/oracle/so
On 6/15/20 11:14 PM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
2020-06-14 16:00:58 +0200, Martijn Dekker:
I am now the maintainer of what is currently, to the best of my knowledge,
the only actively developed fork of AT&T ksh93. It is based on the last
stable AST version, 93u+ 2012-08-01. Along with a few others
2020-06-14 16:00:58 +0200, Martijn Dekker:
> I am now the maintainer of what is currently, to the best of my knowledge,
> the only actively developed fork of AT&T ksh93. It is based on the last
> stable AST version, 93u+ 2012-08-01. Along with a few others I have been
> fixing a bunch of bugs. See
Op 14-06-20 om 18:03 schreef shwaresyst:
The command alias is nominally conforming, I believe, in that recursive
alias expansion isn't permitted so looking for a utility named command
still occurs.
So are you saying that, in order to be POSIXly sure of running a
standard command 'foo' given t
The command alias is nominally conforming, I believe, in that recursive alias
expansion isn't permitted so looking for a utility named command still occurs.
However, the implementation of various utilities as aliases changes the
reporting of 'command -v', or '-V', to that they are aliases and
