Re: [Test Breakage 2.46.0-rc0] Test t0021.35 fails on NonStop

> <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
> 
> > This looks like a different between ksh and bash. Under bash, the test
> > works. I can live with that but will have to force bash to be used as the
> > shebang #!/bin/sh defaults to ksh on this box.
> 
> It turns out that the version of ksh I used in my description does
> not seem to grok "local" at all. I vaguely recall that we've written
> off various hobbist reimplementation of ksh as unusable enough, but
> this one is ksh93 direct from AT&T Research.
> 
> I guess when we said "as long as we limit our use to a simple 'this
> variable has visibility limited to the function and its children'
> and nothing else, it is portable enough across practically everybody
> we care about", we have written off the real ksh, too.
> 
> In the meantime, we may want to document this in a more prominent
> way.  Perhaps like so:
> 
> -------- >8 --------------- >8 --------------- >8 --------
> Subject: doc: guide to use of "local" shell language construct
> 
> The scripted Porcelain commands do not allow use of "local" because
> it is not universally supported, but we use it liberally in our test
> scripts, which means some POSIX compliant shells (like "ksh93") can
> not be used to run our tests.
> 
> Document the status quo, and hint that we might want to change the
> situation in the fiture.