On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:20:54 +0200 Roland Mainz wrote: > Erm... my original patch (and request) was about the introduction of a > hidden+private alias for "getconf" (called "astgetconf") which the test > suite should use instead and then we could disable the "getconf" builtin > command on our side (temporarily - which should give us a way to do our > ksh93 putback with a working test suite and you would have enougth time > to handle the "getconf" issue in peace) and not your side...
our concern is a temporary fork along with semantics we can't vouch for -- passing regression tests is the first step, but those tests were not written to test the getconf builtin per-se a secondary concern is we would have to build the temporary fork on our side to test possible solaris specific problems on this list -- potentially doubling our debugging and problem replication time -- Glenn Fowler -- AT&T Research, Florham Park NJ --
