On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
> > >
> > > Plea
Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >
> > > We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
> >
> > Please take time out and think about what you're suggesting.
>
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
>
> Please take time out and think about what you're suggesting.
Keith -- when Joerg says OpenSolaris here, I think he's
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
Please take time out and think about what you're suggesting.
Intentionally breaking compatibility with Solaris has the following
implications:
Beginning immediately, appli