On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 02:09:23PM +0200, Michal Hlavinka wrote: > On 8.7.2013 12:43, Irek Szczesniak wrote: > >On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Michal Hlavinka <[email protected]> wrote: > >>On 8.7.2013 08:15, Dan Shelton wrote: > >>> > >>>I'm trying to comprehend this: The ksh93 version in Fedora 19 is a > >>>year old. Does anyone know why? > >>> > >>>Dan > >> > >> > >>Hi Dan, > >>simple answer, because it's latest stable release. KSH in Fedora > >>{17,18,19,rawhide} is 2012-08-01 with some backported fixes. > >> > >>There is no newer stable release. There is no newer beta release. > > > >FYI ast-ksh.20130628 with Roland's fixes for Solaris is *stable*. > > 1) our tests does not share this opinion (I did not try Roland's fixes) > 2) I believe that David and Glen have the best information to decide > whether release XYZ is stable/beta/alpha and if they say it's alpha, > I definitely won't argue with that. > > >Dan is specifically asking for poll(1) - Redhat's competitors were a > >lot faster in backporting *that* particular feature. > > 1) Beware that Redhat != Fedora. > 2) Different Linux distributions use different strategies. Fedora has > policy that major updates of packages in released products are > discouraged and AFAIK update to alpha/beta is strongly > discouraged/forbidden except in rare cases where there is no other > solution (for example original version being seriously broken or > security issue).
The same policy is valid here. The only reason for to include poll(1)
was simply that it had survived the test suite together our own tests
here *and* that a customer had asked for. If only one user would report
a bug caused by the poll(1) feature the patch would be removed.
Werner
--
"Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr
pgpptolHWy7Pz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
