Josh Hurst writes: > I have asked for Roland for ksh93 in /sbin over and over again because > /sbin/sh is a calamity. It lacks simple features like POSIX > conformance and even the basic features of shells available in other > operating systems are missing in this shell. While this project > currently does not aim at replacing /sbin/sh it would be nice to > provide an alternative.
Why is typing /sbin/ksh93 substantially simpler than typing /bin/ksh93 to get the same functionality? It's the lack of an important usage case -- one that can't be handled in any reasonable way with /usr/bin/ksh93 -- that makes me ask why this needs to be done right now. -- James Carlson, KISS Network <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
