Antonello Cruz wrote: > Roland Mainz wrote: > > Ceri Davies wrote: > > ...putback) which use it can be switched to ksh93 by replacing the first > > like from "#!/sbin/sh" to "#!/usr/bin/ksh93" (ksh93 is sufficiently > > backwards-compatible to the original Bourne shell that this works > > out-of-the-box). > Humm... not convinced it is backward compatible with /sbin/sh. I haven't > forgotten yet that I needed to link /sbin/sh to /usr/has/bin/sh to have > bringover working on OpenSolaris.
ksh93 is backwards-compatible with the original Bourne shell but there are exceptions where the original Bourne shell differs from the POSIX shell standard (AFAIK this is around a half dozend differences but mostly in areas where normal scripts never venture (like the "set" builtin passing the return code through in the original Bourne shell while POSIX requires "set" to set it, multibyte character handling issues (which was never part of the original Bourne shell, crude multibyte support was "tacked-on" later), more reserved keywords+variables in the POSIX shell standard, arithmetric expressions (e.g. (( expr )) where the original Bourne shell only sees two subshells etc.)) ...) ... ... but the "bringover" issue is somthing different: It's a coding bug in usr/src/cmd/sh/ which if I recall the issue correctly causes pattern matching errors to be silently ignored and "bringover" relies on this behaviour. Craigh Moorman is currently sponsoring my fix for "bringover" but I am now wondering why fixing the Bourne shell itself would be usefull, too (at least it would kill the complains about this "incompatiblity" ... =:-) ). ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;)
