>Don Cragun wrote: >> We also propose to replace the file /usr/xpg6/bin/xargs with a link to >> /usr/bin/xargs, so that old programs that may have hardcoded the path >> to the XPG6 version of xargs can continue to operate properly. > >Is this intended to be the architecture of reference for when we fully >unify an xpg?/bin variant with its bin variant ? That is symlinks must >be provided ? > >I'm okay if that is the case, I just want to know of this case is >setting new case law.
I thought we never used the full pathnames and that setting $PATH was the only supported way? Casper
