Darren J Moffat wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
However there are multiple workarounds (already described in other
postings here (e.g. use fully qualified path, an alias to the full path
etc.)) and AFAIK at least the following solutions:
1. pfksh93 checks whether there is a RBAC entry for the
Roland Mainz roland.mainz at nrubsig.org wrote:
From my experience I'd say that the author of a script that explicitly
uses #!/usr/bin/pfksh rather than #!/usr/bin/ksh is expecting a
different behaviour with respect to builtins.
As far as the test suite for ksh93 is concerned I think
Roland Mainz roland.mainz at nrubsig.org wrote:
This issue is not ksh93-specific - it's specific (but not limited to)
almost all POSIX(-like) shells... for example a pfbash would have the
same problem and AFAIK you don't even have a way to turn them off... ;-(
Fortunately nobody likes to make
Roland Mainz wrote:
I would expect that both shells behave exactly the same way unless there
are RBAC rules active which require a different behaviour.
There aren't RBAC rules but the whole point of RBAC and thus a profile
version of ksh93 is that if the user has an RBAC profile entry for a
Roland Mainz wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
[snip]
I would highly recommend not trying to address pfksh93 as part of this
project but cover it when the project to do ksh93 as /usr/bin/ksh comes
along. This gives you more time to deal with it and work with the
OpenSolaris security community
I did agree (and put it in email) that ksh93 is actually better in this
case since there is a way to turn off the builtins. Where I don't agree
is that the writer of the script should have to know to do that when
ksh93 is operating as pfksh93.
What I was planning to do for pfksh was
David Korn wrote:
I did agree (and put it in email) that ksh93 is actually better in this
case since there is a way to turn off the builtins. Where I don't agree
is that the writer of the script should have to know to do that when
ksh93 is operating as pfksh93.
What I was planning to
From: Roland Mainz roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
...
Well, I hoped that it is somehow possible to have more than one ARC case
for the ksh93-integration, e.g. put this version back, collect user
feedback and then implementARC the necessary suggestions/changes...
which is now a little bit tricky
