"Ted Unangst" <t...@tedunangst.com> writes: > Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: >> Tristan Le Guern <tlegu...@bouledef.eu> writes: >> >> > On 02/16/2015 05:22 PM, Todd C. Miller wrote: >> >> There are scripts that use KSH_VERSION to determine whether they >> >> are being run under ksh or a Bourne shell. That seems like a >> >> reasonable thing to do. I don't really care what the version >> >> number is set to. Using the OpenBSD version seems reasonable >> >> and could be generated at build time. >> > >> > Same thing for me: I don't care about the content of this variable, just >> > about its presence. The same for BASH_VERSION or ZSH_VERSION. >> >> Maybe you don't, but our ksh isn't the only ksh around. >> >> Removing "PD KSH" from KSH_VERSION would just break scripts that probe >> the content of this variable. > > So let's return to the top. What does "PD KSH" in KSH_VERSION mean? What does > one do differently if that string is present or missing?
sigh pdksh is not the same thing as ksh88 or ksh93. And not the same thing as mksh, which has grew features since it was based on pdksh from the OpenBSD tree. And you may want to avoid known problems in some of those, or use known nice features in others, whether it is in scripts or your dotfiles. But for this obviously you have to know which shell you're using. Your proposal to remove the variable or to change significantly its content breaks other people's way to use ksh. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
