This is the mail archive of the firstname.lastname@example.org
mailing list for the Cygwin project. See the Cygwin
home page for more information.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Re: MKS Tool kit copies request
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: MKS Tool kit copies request
- From: "J. J. Farrell" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:44:32 -0800 (PST)
- Delivered-To: email@example.com
- Delivered-To: mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-Reply-To: <31AA903A2A1FD111A06300805F4B6D64025ADECC@ssi2.interix.com> from "Jason Zions" at Mar 15, 99 03:02:21 pm
- Mailing-List: contact email@example.com; run by ezmlm
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
> From: Jason Zions <email@example.com>
> As for Dave Korn claiming that only U/WIN has a "real" KornShell, this
I'm not sure he's ever claimed this. He did point out to MS that
the version they plan to ship isn't very compatible with most
> should be unsurprising. It's his baby, so of course he will claim that he is
> the only arbiter of what a "real" KornShell is. The fact that a program
> might be developed that works exactly the same as his "real" shell of 1993,
> or 1988, doesn't change the fact that he didn't write it, hence it's not
> "real". The only KornShell that's "real" is the latest and greatest build of
> the ksh that lives on the disk drive of Korn's PC; so one might conclude
> from listening to Dave for a while on this subject.
> It would kinda be like Bill Joy claiming there's only one vi, and it's the
> one he sells. An ego-gratifying position, but hardly accurate.
I've never heard Korn speak on the subject, so I've no idea if this
reasonably reflects his views. The Korn shell has been standardized,
in XPG4 at least if not POSIX, and the version marketed by MKS has
long had the reputation of being about the least compatible Korn
shell available on any platform. I've never used it, I've no idea
how accurate that characterization was back then, and I don't know if
they've brought it more closely into line since it was standardized.
Why pay money for a commercial product with a poor reputation when
pdksh is available?
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org