[ksh93-integration-discuss] some questions about ksh93 integration

[Mike Kupfer]

>>>>> "Roland" == Roland Mainz <roland.mainz at nrubsig.org> writes:

Roland> An integration into SFW would make it FAR more difficult to
Roland> convince other consolitations to use it

Why?  SFW is part of Solaris, after all (unlike the Companion CD).  Why
should other consolidations care which consolidation ksh93 comes from?

Roland> An integration just into SFW would also mean that we can
Roland> completly abandon most of the other long-term goals (even such
Roland> low-hanging fruits like a common codebase for /usr/bin/printf,
Roland> /usr/bin/sleep, /usr/bin/cat, /usr/bin/wc etc. etc. will become
Roland> difficult as these tools [live] in OS/Net)

I'm not sure everyone on the list will follow that argument, so I want
to back up for a moment and fill in a couple details, because I think
it's a good point.  (If it's obvious to you what Roland's talking about,
feel free to ignore the rest of this email.)

ksh93 comes with a large set of built-in commands.  The advantage of
having so many built-ins is performance.  But we want to avoid code
duplication, which means structuring the built-ins and the standalone
binaries to use common code.  This will be more of a hassle if ksh93 is
in SFW, because it probably would involve exposing private interfaces
across a consolidation boundary.

mike