Alan Coopersmith writes: > I. Szczesniak wrote: > > Why recommend a switch which is no longer needed in Solaris >= 10 for > > /bin/ksh and /bin/ksh93? > > Because it does no harm there, and prevents massive harm on older releases, > which we know millions of people are still using.
Also because there are scripts (primarily in the Install consolidation and in packaging) that are intentionally run on older releases, and _MUST_ remain compatible if we ever expect anyone to upgrade. Currently, the policy is N-2, meaning that we support upgrade from S8 FCS or newer up to S10, and from S9 FCS or newer to Nevada. When you're running Live Upgrade, the packaging scripts (class action and pre/postinstall) are run on the system being upgraded, not in the environment to which you're upgrading. In other words, the Nevada packaging scripts *are* intentionally executed on S9 systems. I appreciate the urge to modernize, but please don't break the upgrade path by ksh93ing those scripts. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <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
