On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 16:15:45 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> Cool, here's the diff. unifdef gives me the same result on jobs.c,
> except for the indentation change in two conditionals. ok?
OK millert@
- todd
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:15:45PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05 2018, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
> >> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> >>
> >> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> >> > sense to just
On Fri, Jan 05 2018, "Theo de Raadt" wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>>
>> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
>> > sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
>> > with no job control
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
>
> > I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> > sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
> > with no job control in space-constrained installers.
>
> I don't see
On Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:20:03 +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote:
> I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd, would it make
> sense to just delete the #ifdefs? I doubt that we'll want to ship a ksh
> with no job control in space-constrained installers.
I don't see any reason to
On Thu, Jan 04 2018, Klemens Nanni wrote:
> A few guards are missing, with this diff ksh compiles cleanly with JOBS
> undefined.
>
> Found while looking for undesired changes after working on job control.
>
> Feedback?
Looks good, ok jca@
I kinda take job control in my shell for granted. Todd,