On 7/27/06, James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com> wrote: > Martin Schaffstall writes: > > On 7/27/06, Casper.Dik at sun.com <Casper.Dik at sun.com> wrote: > > > >PS: Somehow I have the feeling that Sun doesn't want to see the > > > >project succeed in replacing ksh88 with ksh93, a feeling which is > > > >based on the open hostilities from Sun personnel and the permanent > > > >delays :( > > > > > > No, that's not true at all. I and other have wanted ksh93 in Solaris > > > for a long time, provided it is done properly. > > > > Somehow I can't really believe that. Currently I associate "Casper > > Disk" with the term "ksh93 hater" because each time we have this topic > > Casper Disk sends another hate mail > > Sorry, I don't see it. Where's the "hate?"
Casper is always there when he can beat onto ksh93. > I think this is getting personal, and I don't think that's at all > necessary. The _only_ issues I've seen relate to technical matters, > and not at all to "hatred." This is not personal. It is just an observation > Many of us use ksh93 on Solaris and would very much like to see it > integrated. We just don't want to see a huge flood of bugs and broken > applications as the result -- because we value compatibility. Call it > a fetish if you like, but it's not hatred. Sometimes Sun values the holy backwards compatibility over usability. The PAIN for users and developers caused by this policy far outweighs the benefits. The majority of people who suffer from /bin/ksh in Solaris thinks like that. If you don't believe me read http://anotherhangover.blogspot.com/2006/06/solaris-can-fck-off-kinda.html http://www.osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=15007&limit=no&threshold=-1 or just search in Google for 'solaris ksh sucks': 15,100 hits -- // Martin Schaffstall // EMail: martin.schaffstall at googlemail.com \\ // \X/
