search for: ksh88

...d the > environment that suited the requirements best. Bash is a better command shell for many people, but ksh has better scripting ability (eg typescript options bash has never seen). Many Solaris provided scripts were ksh. Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88 licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting course to my local LUG, but AT&T (David Korn himsef!) told me I couldn't give people copies of the shell to take home. (Finally, too late in the day, they changed their licensing). -- rgds Stephen

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 03:15:27PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Stephen Harris <lists at spuddy.org> wrote: > > > Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88 > > licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting > > course to my local LUG, but AT&T (David Korn himsef!) told me I couldn't > > give people copies of the shell to take home. > > AFAIR, ksh was OSS (but not using an OSI approved license) sinc...

...AM -0400, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it > became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license agreement > include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution? In 1990, when I started using ksh88, it was totally commercial. Binaries were $$$ and source was $$$$. We bought the source and compiled it for SunOS, Ultrix and various SYSVr[23] machines (one machine was so old it didn't understand #! and so needed it placed as /bin/sh). By 1998, ksh93 was free (as in beer) but was restricte...

...i, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:32:45AM -0400, Scott Robbins wrote: > Wasn't Solaris, which for awhile at least, was probably the most popular > Unix, using ksh by default? Solaris /bin/sh was a real real dumb version of the bourne shell. Solaris included /bin/ksh as part of the core distribution (ksh88 was a part of the SVr4 specification) and so many scripts were written with #!/bin/ksh at the start (including tools like "patchadd"). Note Solaris had bugs in those tools because they didn't start "#!/bin/ksh -p" so if you had a $ENVFILE that included lines like "set...

I have a little niggling situation that I would like to resolve programmatically. I use Git as my SCM and I have release branches which are sometimes patched. I find myself sometimes entering the working directory tree forgetting that I was last on a release branch and not on the master. What I would like to do is to have a script run every time that I enter a directory, check for .git, and if

Stephen Harris <lists at spuddy.org> wrote: > Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of ksh88 > licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting > course to my local LUG, but AT&T (David Korn himsef!) told me I couldn't > give people copies of the shell to take home. AFAIR, ksh was OSS (but not using an OSI approved license) since 1997. Since 2001, ksh...

Stephen Harris wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 03:15:27PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: >> Stephen Harris <lists at spuddy.org> wrote: >> >> > Bash was bigger than ksh in the non-commercial Unix world because of >> > ksh88 licensing problems. Back in 1998 I wanted to teach a ksh scripting >> > course to my local LUG, but AT&T (David Korn himsef!) told me I >> > couldn't give people copies of the shell to take home. >> >> AFAIR, ksh was OSS (but not using an OSI approved license)...

...-cent.us wrote: >> Fascinating. As I'd been in Sun OS, and started doing admin work when it >> became Solaris, I'd missed that bit. A question: did the license >> agreement include payment, or was it just restrictive on distribution? > > In 1990, when I started using ksh88, it was totally commercial. Binaries > were $$$ and source was $$$$. We bought the source and compiled it for > SunOS, Ultrix and various SYSVr[23] machines (one machine was so old it > didn't understand #! and so needed it placed as /bin/sh). I just (finally) got into Unix in '...

It was the mid/late-90s, but I seem to recall Bourne being the default shell, although sh/ksh/csh were all available with a typical install. On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Scott Robbins <scottro at nyc.rr.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 08:02:56AM -0400, mark wrote: > > On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete Geenhuizen wrote: > > > > > >On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote:

On 04/24/15 06:57, Pete Geenhuizen wrote: > > On 04/24/15 06:07, E.B. wrote: >> I'm sure most people here know about Dash in Debian. Have there >> been discussions about providing a more efficient shell in Centos >> for use with heavily invoked non-interactive scripts? >> >> With sh being a link to bash in Centos I don't know if it would >> explode

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=826 Summary: RFE: scp and ssh should have an option to set the group- id at login time Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.8p1 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: Miscellaneous

...o replace systemd with it, much as ZFS is starting to replace the horrid lash-up that is ext4/xfs+md+LVM+DM. What I *don?t* want is more of this retrenchment to SysVInit. I liked it well enough within its limitations, but we can do better in 2018. (It?s a related tragedy that a slightly modified ksh88 remains the most powerful general purpose scripting language mandated by POSIX three decades after it was released by AT&T. We?ve got better alternatives here, too.) >> For an init system to gain sufficient momentum, it must be the default, with no easy way to avoid it. > > That&...

...th it, much as ZFS is starting to replace the horrid lash-up that is ext4/xfs+md+LVM+DM. > > What I *don?t* want is more of this retrenchment to SysVInit. I liked it well enough within its limitations, but we can do better in 2018. > > (It?s a related tragedy that a slightly modified ksh88 remains the most powerful general purpose scripting language mandated by POSIX three decades after it was released by AT&T. We?ve got better alternatives here, too.) > >>> For an init system to gain sufficient momentum, it must be the default, with no easy way to avoid it. >&gt...

On Oct 17, 2018, at 10:03 AM, Mark Rousell <mark.rousell at signal100.com> wrote: > > launchd is not being forced on them as systemd is in practice Try doing without launchd on macOS. If you think that?s irrelevant, count the number of MacBooks at the next FreeBSD conference you attend. For an init system to gain sufficient momentum, it must be the default, with no easy way to

...as_cr_letters$as_cr_LETTERS as_cr_digits='0123456789' as_cr_alnum=$as_cr_Letters$as_cr_digits ECHO_C= ECHO_N= ECHO_T= case `echo -n x` in #((((( -n*) case `echo 'xy\c'` in *c*) ECHO_T=' ';; # ECHO_T is single tab character. xy) ECHO_C='\c';; *) echo `echo ksh88 bug on AIX 6.1` > /dev/null ECHO_T=' ';; esac;; *) ECHO_N='-n';; esac rm -f conf$$ conf$$.exe conf$$.file if test -d conf$$.dir; then rm -f conf$$.dir/conf$$.file else rm -f conf$$.dir mkdir conf$$.dir 2>/dev/null fi if (echo >conf$$.file) 2>/dev/null;...