Regarding: "How to create a ksh93 package..." Charles Wilson wrote:
> > Maybe we need a top-level /opt directory? OTOH, I see no need for > /usr/ast/* instead of "ksh, and the DLLs go in /usr/bin; stub > executables that are ksh-replacements for "standard unix tools" -- > regardless of whether cygwin has "normal" ports yet -- go in > /usr/bin/ksh/ or /usr/libexec/ksh/ or wherever. I think the "/opt/<package>" structure would be the best way to move towards the "File Heierarchy Standard" Just a passing opinion. > > -- David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access Advocate "By God's Grace I am a Christian man, by my actions a great sinner." -- The Way of a Pilgrim; R. M. French, tr. Life is too short to tolerate crappy software. .
