* Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:50:39PM CET: > Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de> writes: > > > Where did you get the idea that TMOUT is a reliable way to detect ksh? > > You're right - the existence of TMOUT is not a reliable way to detect > ksh, and I had better not document it as such. However, the > non-existence of TMOUT is (so far) a reliable way to detect a non-ksh > shell, and since (so far) only ksh/pdksh provide print(1), as well as > always providing a default for TMOUT, a failed TMOUT test is a way to > shave off two forks on a shell that is not likely to have print(1). zsh provides a print(1) which has -r, I don't know since which version. It does not set TMOUT by default. Did you try zsh before applying the patch? FWIW, all ksh versions I've tried do set TMOUT. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
