ksh as replacement for sh on 3b1

[John McMillan]

In article <901 at hsi86.hsi.UUCP> stevens at hsi.UUCP (Richard Stevens) writes:
>In article <1717 at mtunb.ATT.COM>, jcm at mtunb.ATT.COM (John McMillan) writes:
>> 
>> 1) Replacing SH with KSH is a serious breach of sanity.
>> 	KSH is ALMOST a superset of SH -- but the differences are VERY
>> 	REAL.  It can waste hours or days for support people when folks
>> 	play this game.
>
>That's funny, because the latest release of the KornShell from the
>Toolchest specifically lists the UNIX-PC as one of the systems
>on which ksh has been used as a replacement for sh.  Perhaps you're
>referring to the older version of ksh (circa 1986) that  comes with
>the 3b1 ?

The MAJOR cases of MY being mis-directed on a 3B1 happened a coupla
years ago.  Even in the past 4 weeks I've heard someone complain
about this practice -- regarding a 6386, I believe.  Discrepancies
between the two are numerous, but I don't keep the lists.  The last
time _I_ was bitten by one of these differences was a few months ago
when something like 'set -- getopt ...' got me, as I remember.
(Nope, I don't remember which type of hardware I was driving at the
time.)

_I_ am not about to presume someone has performed an exhaustive test
of the compatibility mentioned in a Toolchest article.  I do not
dispute it: I just find it irrelevant.  How much is life improved
by the replacement?  Very little for me.  Not enough to warrant
the possible down-stream aggrevation, certainly.  I exec ksh in
my .profile and I use it all the time... by its name.

If YOU want to add to your experience of shared-suffering on this
planet, then DO things like this:  I'm more interested in
minimizing MY pain than yours !-)  My comment was directed towards
sparing folks trouble, not invoking biblical threats....  There's
common agreement _MY_ sanity was breached and sunk LOoooong ago.

jc mcmillan	-- att!mtunb!jcm	-- muttering for self, not THEM