Roland Mainz writes: > > > Or libshell? Or libast? I seems that there is no compelling reason to > > > accept ksh93 at all > > > > None of this justifies putting ksh into root. > > What about |libc::wordexp()| ?
Yes, I'd like to see it fixed. I filed CR 4771992 four years ago to outline both the performance and security problems posed by the implementation. It's not good. In fact, in many cases, it's just not usable at all. As it stands, the project proposed doesn't actually fix this problem. > At least for correctness reasons it > should work in any runlevel with and without /usr being mounted (note we > have working code in the ksh93-integration prototype002 codebase which > uses ksh93 for |libc::wordexp()| - in theory the code is there to fix > this issue once and for all). "In theory" doesn't quite work here. If the scope of this project is widened to encompass replacing wordexp with something less horrible, and if the right answer for handling embedded shell expansion in wordexp parsing is to exec ksh93, then you've got at least one possibly good argument to put ksh93 (or at least some portion of it) in the root file system. -- 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
