On 9/26/06, Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> Darren J Moffat <Darren.Moffat at Sun.COM> wrote:
>
> > April Chin wrote:
> > > An update from the project team on the pfksh93 issue...
> > >
> > > Although some ideas on disabling built-ins for pfksh93
> > > has been proposed, the team has agreed to remove pfksh93 from the case,
> > > so we can investigate the correct solution carefully in a future case,
> > > without impeding this case.
> > >
> > > I will remove mention of pfksh93 and the -P and -o profile
> > > options from the proposed ksh93.1 and other manpages in the case
> > > materials.
> >
> > Thanks I'm happy with that outcome. Project team please seek the help
> > of the security community rather than trying to work this out on your
> > own. You can reach us at security-discuss at opensolaris.org
>
> If you remove pfhsh93, you make ksh93 a second class citizen
> and gives a bad start for ksh93. Don't do that, rather solve the problems.
Yeah. Removing it is a bad idea. I wish ARC would get some mind and
stop removing all cool features from ksh93 just because they don't
understand it. Maybe they learn to do their homework before asking
stupid questions
--
_ Felix Schulte
_|_|_ mailto:felix.schulte at gmail.com
(0 0)
ooO--(_)--Ooo