[ksh93-integration-discuss] Re: /etc/ksh.kshrc forksh93[PSARC/2006/587 Timeout: 10/24/2006]

[Roland Mainz]

Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> 
> > From: Richard Lowe <richlowe at richlowe.net>
> ...
> > (I do still harbour some concern regarding any future ksh(1) or sh(1)
> > migration, however, but that's another case).
> 
> Very interesting question.
> 
> Don (as in Cragun), would having a default edit mode for ksh93 prevent
> it from eventually becoming the SUS conforming ksh?

AFAIK there is no "SUS-conforming ksh", only a "SUS-conforming sh" ...
and AFAIK the answer is "no" because the standard doesn't prevent the
implementation of extra startup files and does not standartize the
content of such files, including /etc/profile and /etc/ksh.kshrc ...
those files are sourced after the shell started. AFAIK the only
requirement is that the shell must not have any "set -o" flags turned on
at startup - but this is before the point where any startup files (like
/etc/profile, ~/.profile, /etc/ksh.kshrc and ~/.kshrc) are sourced.

----

Bye,
Roland

P.S.: We may want (not this case, not this case, not...) to adjust ksh93
to source /etc/sh.shrc and ~/.shrc when launched as /usr/bin/sh or
/usr/xpg4/bin/sh and then ask the standard people to include this in the
standard (because it is usefull... :-) ).

-- 
  __ .  . __
 (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org
  \__\/\/__/  MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
  /O /==\ O\  TEL +49 641 7950090
 (;O/ \/ \O;)