Roland Mainz wrote: > Stefan Teleman wrote: >> Roland Mainz wrote: >>> or "you >>> must come-up with 'solid, unbendable proof' that the changes do not >>> break anything" (<--- nasty comment of the day: Right now some stuff >>> delivered via SFWNV (like "bash") doesn't even pass it's own test suite >>> in the way how it's build in SFWNV)) and may even be impossible for >>> people without access to matching hardware. >> i'm updating bash to 4.0. soon-ish. > > Erm... could we please sync our work ? I've been working on that since a > longer time now (trying to dig-out all issues and getting it more or > less in feature-sync with the ksh93-integration work (e.g. see > http://svn.genunix.org/repos/on/branches/ksh93/gisburn/arc/bash4/wishlist.txt)) > and try to get the ARC case done in two weeks...
could you please explain why do we need a 64-bit bash ? i know it's "cool". does it do anything that a 32-bit largefile-aware bash doesn't ? i think the bash demo stuff belongs in /contrib. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman Sun Microsystems, Inc. stefan.teleman at Sun.COM
