On Feb 4, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Peter Memishian wrote: > >>> It's fine to make use of the ksh builtin support for various >>> commands, but >>> can we please learn from the problems that occurred when we >>> changed sleep >>> to be a builtin recently (e.g. 6793120) and instead create trivial >>> wrapper >>> *programs* that access the builtin functionality through libshell? >> >> I already have a fix (tested and queued for my sponsor) for CR >> #6793120 >> which does something similar as you've proposed... > > So there is a unique pid for each program and thus it can still be > pkill'd?
If so, and if this fix involves wrappers, Wouldn't we have lost the "no fork/exec" advantage of having shell builtins in the first place, right? /dale
