Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!ukma!gatech!ulysses!ggs
From: ggs@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Griff Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: ksh script execution (Re: make importing SHELL)
Summary: don't jump on me, it wasn't my idea
Message-ID: <10678@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Date: 1 Oct 88 14:13:42 GMT
References: <452@alice.marlow.uucp> <67870@sun.uucp> <67925@sun.uucp> <4273@dunkshot.mips.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 27

In article <4273@dunkshot.mips.COM>, dce@mips.COM (David Elliott) writes:
| In article <10669@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> ggs@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Griff Smith) writes:
| >If $SHELL is set to point
| >to ksh, a shell script can be executed by forking and interpreting the
| >script in the child (don't ask about the kludges required to make this
| >work reliably, I don't think I want to know).
| 
| Kludges required to make this work reliably?  How about the kludges
| required to make it work correctly?
| 
| Unless ksh tosses all aliases and functions when it starts a subshell,
| [confusing execution of scripts] can happen.

It does toss them, unless you "export" the aliases.  This is considered
to be another performance enhancement; you can avoid having to read the
definitions from the .env file.  I think the feature is confusing,
since it promises something that can't always be delivered unless #!
is outlawed and $SHELL is set to a name of ksh.

If I remember correctly, V9 does export functions.  Since I haven't
used it, I don't know how the design avoids confused execution in naive
scripts.
-- 
Griff Smith	AT&T (Bell Laboratories), Murray Hill
Phone:		1-201-582-7736
UUCP:		{most AT&T sites}!ulysses!ggs
Internet:	ggs@ulysses.att.com