Mike Kupfer wrote: > > >>>>> "Josh" == Josh Hurst <joshhurst at gmail.com> writes: > > Josh> How to you rate the getconf bug? P1? > > Breaking compatibility of a Committed interface could be anywhere from > P1-P3, depending on the actual impact of the change.
Yes, but someone could easily argue about the backwards-compatibility of the AST vesion of "getconf", right ? :-) It's not easy if you try to be compatible to two different things which should be merged. > Putting back with the ksh93 test suite broken would probably be a P3, > especially since Roland's very concerned about having a working test > suite to catch regressions as early as possible. Yes... IMO the test suite is mission-critical (except the one issue we have with the LD_LIBRARY_PATH thing - but that's nothing serious). We wouldn't be better than the old Solaris /usr/bin/ksh which lacked this "safeguard" and was hacked to something which is no longer compatible to anything (like the original ksh88i or it's siblings on other Unix versions) except itself. I really wish the "getconf" problem could be handled as "bug" which can be fixed with one of the following putbacks. We know the problem and thanks to the long debate even Googling for it has become easy (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ksh93+getconf&btnG=Google+Search points directly to this list for the first four results) ... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
