Mike Kupfer wrote:
> >>>>> "Roland" == Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> writes:
> Roland> IMO the AST builtins only need to conform to POSIX, if anyone
> Roland> needs more in Solaris they have to turn off the builtins first
> Roland> or address the Solaris-extened versions explicitly by full path.
>
> Now that I have a better understanding of the differences in uname
> output, my recommendation would be to disable ksh93's built-in uname on
> Solaris.
>
> - scripts that assume a Solaris environment will continue to work.
> (This will be needed for ksh93 to replace /usr/bin/ksh.)
>
> - scripts that are written to be more portable should also work, since
> they presumably will not be confused by the additional information
> that the Solaris uname provides (and which the standard allows for)
Maybe it doesn't need to be disabled, just the path prefix (currently
it's "/bin") needs to be changed - either to /usr/xpg4/bin/uname (which
means the builtin is used when ${PATH} contains /usr/xpg4/bin/ and the
matching ${PATH} element is searched) or /usr/ast/bin/uname.
Based on April's comment in
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ksh93-integration-discuss/2006-May/000336.html
the 2nd option ("/usr/ast/bin/uname") would be my preference since there
is no /usr/xpg4/bin/uname binary and "/usr/ast/bin/uname will only
affect scripts which add /usr/ast/bin/ to their ${PATH}
----
Bye,
Roland
--
__ . . __
(o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
\__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
/O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
(;O/ \/ \O;)
