> X-Original-To: ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Delivered-To: ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org
> From: Mike Kupfer <mike.kupfer at sun.com>
> To: ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org
> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:20:58 -0700
> Subject: [ksh93-integration-discuss] getconf
> X-BeenThere: ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
> List-Id: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion
<ksh93-integration-discuss.opensolaris.org>
> List-Unsubscribe:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ksh93-integration-discuss>,
<mailto:ksh93-integration-discuss-request at
opensolaris.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss>
> List-Post: <mailto:ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org>
> List-Help:
<mailto:ksh93-integration-discuss-request at opensolaris.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ksh93-integration-discuss>,
<mailto:ksh93-integration-discuss-request at opensolaris.org?subject=subscribe>
>
> For the folks on the project list: in the process of disabling the ksh93
> builtins that are incompatible with their Solaris counterparts, Roland
> has discovered that disabling getconf breaks the test suite. There's
> been some off-list discussion of how to handle that, mostly focusing on
> the short-term approach for the initial integration into ON. (More on
> that in a future mail.)
>
> >>>>> "April" == April Chin <April.Chin at eng.sun.com> writes:
>
> April> Yes, the Solaris OS has three versions of getconf--
> April> /usr/bin/getconf, /usr/xpg4/bin/getconf and
> April> /usr/xpg6/bin/getconf. A user who configures his path to conform
> April> with SUSv2 or SUSv3 will expect to pick up the corresponding
> April> getconf which will return different values. In ksh93, executing
> April> getconf with no pathname prefix, just "getconf...", will execute
> April> the ksh93 getconf built-in which is incompatible with our getconf
> April> binaries and will not work differently depending on the usr's
> April> path. Clearly we need to get this resolved before we replace
> April> /usr/bin/ksh, but I'm not sure what the resolution is.
>
> I thought we already had a plan for the general case of builtins, which
> is that the behavior of the builtin would depend on $PATH? Did I miss
> something?
The built-in behavior *may* depend on $PATH, if that built-in is
bound to a pathname.
In the ksh93 to be integrated into Solaris, some built-ins are bound to a
path (/bin for cat, chown, head, mkdir, rmdir, tee, uniq, wc; /usr/ast/bin
for some 35 built-ins: basename, cat, chmod, etc.). In the default
ksh93, getconf is a standalone built-in, not bound to a path,
but since it is incompatible with the Solaris getconf binaries,
it should be disabled for the ksh93 to be integrated into Solaris.
The PSARC approval does not allow for any incompatible default behavior
for built-ins (the /usr/ast/bin built-ins need to be explicitly
"turned on" by adding /usr/ast/bin to the path). The ksh93 test suites
require some ksh93 builtin getconf functionality not provided
by the Solaris getconf utilities.
April
>
> mike
> _______________________________________________
> ksh93-integration-discuss mailing list
> ksh93-integration-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ksh93-integration-discuss
