This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: astksh review
- From: Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha at cs dot nyu dot edu>
- To: Dario Alcocer <alcocer at helixdigital dot com>
- Cc: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 14:50:47 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: astksh review
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Dario Alcocer wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 09:09:46AM +0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
> > I created the ksh symlink so users wouldn't have to edit their shebang
> > lines to point to `/bin/pdksh' but now we have the proper ksh (available)
> > I suppose I could get rid of it. What's the feeling?
> >
> > We could do one of
> >
> > 1. Remove the ksh symlink from the pdksh package.
> > 2. Rename ksh.exe (in astksh) to astksh.exe and have a ksh symlink to
> > astksh.exe
> > 3. Maybe only two options. :-)
> >
> > these?
>
> How about:
> 4. Deprecate the pdksh package.
>
> Now that we have the real, honest-to-goodness ksh, do we really need
> pdksh? Just a suggestion...
No. pdksh is small, intuitive, easy to understand, and builds OOTB with
no special procedures, whereas the build procedure Karsten described for
the AST ksh sounds painful and non-obvious. I'm not downplaying the AST
ksh package, but I think pdksh should be offered as well. Besides, what's
the harm (as long as sdescs and ldescs are accurate)?
Igor
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ igor@watson.ibm.com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster." -- Patrick Naughton