Article View: comp.bugs.sys5
Article #275Re: Nasty bug in release 4 Bourne shell
From: Guy Harris
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 1991 06:07
Date: Sat, 05 Jan 1991 06:07
16 lines
1306 bytes
1306 bytes
>This exec bug does NOT appear to be in the SPARC version of V.4, >in either sh or ksh. So if it was fixed by somebody working on the SPARC version, has that fix been sent back to AT&T? The theory is, after all, that V.4 is V.4 is V.4; I wouldn't want to have to choose a processor for my desktop based on which versions of some bit of processor-independent code got into the official releases for various processors. Who is the "keeper" of the various V.4 ports to the "major" microprocessors? Does USL keep them all in-house - in which case one would hope that they would have a *single* source tree for all of them, with machine-independent code *including* most of the kernel shared between all processors, or at least that they'd be working on doing so - or are some of them only in the hands of the organization that did the port and their customers?
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5048@auspex.auspex.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!auspex!guyReferences:
<andy.662338820@xwkg> <9233@hobbit.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!auspex!guy From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.bugs.sys5 Subject: Re: Nasty bug in release 4 Bourne shell Keywords: Bourne shell, exec, redirection Message-ID: <5048@auspex.auspex.com> Date: 5 Jan 91 06:07:17 GMT References: <andy.662338820@xwkg> <9233@hobbit.UUCP> Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara Lines: 16