Mike Kupfer wrote: > > >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Price <dp at eng.sun.com> writes: > > Dan> I agree that if we're going to go replace wc, etc. with things from > Dan> ksh, then there may well be a compelling argument to bringing this > Dan> stuff into ON, since the level of mixing will be high. > > Dan> But then... wouldn't we be tying the implementation of wc, etc. to > Dan> the *private interfaces* of something which originates externally? > > I was assuming that the common code would live somewhere else in the > source tree and be owned by ON, rather than being owned by ksh93. > Though now that you mention it, I guess that approach has its own set of > issues, like how to package/build an unbundled (direct from ATT) version > of ksh93 for Solaris.
Erm... actually the idea was to sync both sources and make the standalone commands wrappers which call into libcmd.so - this is less troublesome and would boost performace a lot since the main code would be in a shared and (usually after boot) preloaded area. Note that we do NOT target that for the initial putback - that one should only "minimal invasive", e.g. it should only affect parts of OS/Net which are unavoidable (I am going to explain that in more detail in my reply to one of Dan Price's emails later this night...). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;)
