This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [ITP] mksh 2.6.3 -- MirBSD Korn shell, improved pdksh implementation
- From: Jari Aalto <jari dot aalto at cante dot net>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 08:28:59 +0300
- Subject: Re: [ITP] mksh 2.6.3 -- MirBSD Korn shell, improved pdksh implementation
- References: <7j5e80mn.fsf@cante.net> <Pine.GSO.4.63.0605011307440.28555@access1.cims.nyu.edu>
Igor Peshansky <pechtcha-+I05ep9qJbk3uPMLIKxrzw@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
> As the pdksh maintainer, I would like to veto having this package in the
> distro simultaneously with pdksh (since this is a newer version of pretty
> much the same package). In fact, I've been (slowly) working on preparing
> a new release of pdksh that includes many of the mirbsd patches. I don't
> mind obsoleting pdksh in favor of mksh, but we'll need to coordinate this.
>
> Jari, you might want to review the pending complaints about pdksh to see
> if they are fixed in your mksh version. I can send you a list (with links
> to archives) if you're interested.
Yes please send them,
I've been in contact with the mksh maintainer and already provided a
patch to implement standard shell startup file:
~/.mkshrc
in addition to current use of
~/.profile + ENV
As Debian and Gentoo includes both pdksh and mksh, I'm not sure what
is vetoed here. I'd like not to involve with politics if there is some
schisma between these two development camps. I'd rather like to offer
oppurtunity for users to select what they prefer. Just to oppose
program "because similar is already there to do same thing", would in
fact veto any other program as well, like: MTAs? Sure, there is
already exim4 in Cygwin, why should there were need for more MTAs?
I'd be more in favor of porting applications regardless of "GNOME vs
KDE" type of rivarly.
Jari