typeset in ksh93 not working as expected












5















I thought typeset was ksh's local, but this fails in ksh93
although it works in all my other typeset-supporting shells (bash, yash, zsh, pdksh)



#!/bin/ksh -ex

foo(){
typeset a b
a=0; b=1
return
}
a=a; b=b
foo
#confirm that the globals didn't change
[ "$a" = a ]
[ "$b" = b ]


What gives?










share|improve this question



























    5















    I thought typeset was ksh's local, but this fails in ksh93
    although it works in all my other typeset-supporting shells (bash, yash, zsh, pdksh)



    #!/bin/ksh -ex

    foo(){
    typeset a b
    a=0; b=1
    return
    }
    a=a; b=b
    foo
    #confirm that the globals didn't change
    [ "$a" = a ]
    [ "$b" = b ]


    What gives?










    share|improve this question

























      5












      5








      5








      I thought typeset was ksh's local, but this fails in ksh93
      although it works in all my other typeset-supporting shells (bash, yash, zsh, pdksh)



      #!/bin/ksh -ex

      foo(){
      typeset a b
      a=0; b=1
      return
      }
      a=a; b=b
      foo
      #confirm that the globals didn't change
      [ "$a" = a ]
      [ "$b" = b ]


      What gives?










      share|improve this question














      I thought typeset was ksh's local, but this fails in ksh93
      although it works in all my other typeset-supporting shells (bash, yash, zsh, pdksh)



      #!/bin/ksh -ex

      foo(){
      typeset a b
      a=0; b=1
      return
      }
      a=a; b=b
      foo
      #confirm that the globals didn't change
      [ "$a" = a ]
      [ "$b" = b ]


      What gives?







      shell ksh typeset






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Jul 4 '17 at 9:23









      PSkocikPSkocik

      17.9k44995




      17.9k44995






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          10














          typeset is ksh93's private (using static scoping like perl's my, not local which does dynamic scoping) only for functions that are declared using the ksh function definition style:



          function foo {
          typeset var=whatever
          ...
          }


          With the Bourne syntax (or with the . command (which btw, can also be used on ksh-style functions)), there's no scoping (except for $1, $2... $# of course). So one can use Bourne-style functions to get the value or change the value or type of a variable in the parent context (though typeset -n can also be used for that with the ksh-style.



          In ksh88, typeset was doing dynamic scoping with both the ksh and Bourne function definition style. According to David Korn, POSIX did not specify ksh's variable scoping on the basis that it was dynamic (deemed inferior) which is why he changed it to static scoping for ksh93 (a complete rewrite).



          But in the mean time, other shells have implemented variable scoping and they all did it using dynamic scoping to mimic ksh88's.



          zsh now has a private keyword to have scoping similar to ksh93's in addition to local/typeset with dynamic scoping like in ksh88.



          To see the difference between static and dynamic scoping, compare:



          "$shell" -c 'function f { typeset a=1; g; echo "$a"; }
          function g { echo "$a"; a=2; }
          a=0; f'


          Which with $shell == ksh93 outputs:



          0
          1


          And with ksh88 or bash outputs:



          1
          2


          zsh:



          $ zsh -c 'zmodload zsh/param/private
          f() { private a=1; g; echo $a;}
          g() { echo $a; a=2; }
          a=0; f'
          0
          1


          To be able to use local scope in code portable to bash, zsh, ksh88 ksh93, pdksh, yash or dash/FreeBSD sh, you could do:



          [ -n "$BASH_VERSION" ] && shopt -s expand_aliases
          alias shdef= kshdef='#'
          if type typeset > /dev/null 2>&1; then
          alias mylocal=typeset
          if (a=1; f() { typeset a=2; }; f; [ "$a" = 2 ]); then
          alias shdef='#' kshdef='function'
          fi
          else
          alias mylocal=local
          fi


          And then declare your functions as:



          kshdef foo
          shdef foo()
          {
          mylocal var
          var=value
          ...
          }


          In any case, there are many differences between the behaviour of those local in the various shells. Beside the dynamic vs static consideration mentioned above, there's whether variables initially get an unset or empty value or inherit the value from the parent scope. And there's the interaction with readonly, unset, whether local/typeset is a keyword or builtin (affects split+glob handling)...



          There are other implications of using the ksh-style function definition in ksh93, see the man page for details.



          More reading





          • http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=767 for the POSIX effort to standardize local scope in sh.

          • List of shells support `local` keyword for defining local variables






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:42











          • @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:43






          • 1





            @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 10:08











          • I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 5 '17 at 15:36













          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f375156%2ftypeset-in-ksh93-not-working-as-expected%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          10














          typeset is ksh93's private (using static scoping like perl's my, not local which does dynamic scoping) only for functions that are declared using the ksh function definition style:



          function foo {
          typeset var=whatever
          ...
          }


          With the Bourne syntax (or with the . command (which btw, can also be used on ksh-style functions)), there's no scoping (except for $1, $2... $# of course). So one can use Bourne-style functions to get the value or change the value or type of a variable in the parent context (though typeset -n can also be used for that with the ksh-style.



          In ksh88, typeset was doing dynamic scoping with both the ksh and Bourne function definition style. According to David Korn, POSIX did not specify ksh's variable scoping on the basis that it was dynamic (deemed inferior) which is why he changed it to static scoping for ksh93 (a complete rewrite).



          But in the mean time, other shells have implemented variable scoping and they all did it using dynamic scoping to mimic ksh88's.



          zsh now has a private keyword to have scoping similar to ksh93's in addition to local/typeset with dynamic scoping like in ksh88.



          To see the difference between static and dynamic scoping, compare:



          "$shell" -c 'function f { typeset a=1; g; echo "$a"; }
          function g { echo "$a"; a=2; }
          a=0; f'


          Which with $shell == ksh93 outputs:



          0
          1


          And with ksh88 or bash outputs:



          1
          2


          zsh:



          $ zsh -c 'zmodload zsh/param/private
          f() { private a=1; g; echo $a;}
          g() { echo $a; a=2; }
          a=0; f'
          0
          1


          To be able to use local scope in code portable to bash, zsh, ksh88 ksh93, pdksh, yash or dash/FreeBSD sh, you could do:



          [ -n "$BASH_VERSION" ] && shopt -s expand_aliases
          alias shdef= kshdef='#'
          if type typeset > /dev/null 2>&1; then
          alias mylocal=typeset
          if (a=1; f() { typeset a=2; }; f; [ "$a" = 2 ]); then
          alias shdef='#' kshdef='function'
          fi
          else
          alias mylocal=local
          fi


          And then declare your functions as:



          kshdef foo
          shdef foo()
          {
          mylocal var
          var=value
          ...
          }


          In any case, there are many differences between the behaviour of those local in the various shells. Beside the dynamic vs static consideration mentioned above, there's whether variables initially get an unset or empty value or inherit the value from the parent scope. And there's the interaction with readonly, unset, whether local/typeset is a keyword or builtin (affects split+glob handling)...



          There are other implications of using the ksh-style function definition in ksh93, see the man page for details.



          More reading





          • http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=767 for the POSIX effort to standardize local scope in sh.

          • List of shells support `local` keyword for defining local variables






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:42











          • @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:43






          • 1





            @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 10:08











          • I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 5 '17 at 15:36


















          10














          typeset is ksh93's private (using static scoping like perl's my, not local which does dynamic scoping) only for functions that are declared using the ksh function definition style:



          function foo {
          typeset var=whatever
          ...
          }


          With the Bourne syntax (or with the . command (which btw, can also be used on ksh-style functions)), there's no scoping (except for $1, $2... $# of course). So one can use Bourne-style functions to get the value or change the value or type of a variable in the parent context (though typeset -n can also be used for that with the ksh-style.



          In ksh88, typeset was doing dynamic scoping with both the ksh and Bourne function definition style. According to David Korn, POSIX did not specify ksh's variable scoping on the basis that it was dynamic (deemed inferior) which is why he changed it to static scoping for ksh93 (a complete rewrite).



          But in the mean time, other shells have implemented variable scoping and they all did it using dynamic scoping to mimic ksh88's.



          zsh now has a private keyword to have scoping similar to ksh93's in addition to local/typeset with dynamic scoping like in ksh88.



          To see the difference between static and dynamic scoping, compare:



          "$shell" -c 'function f { typeset a=1; g; echo "$a"; }
          function g { echo "$a"; a=2; }
          a=0; f'


          Which with $shell == ksh93 outputs:



          0
          1


          And with ksh88 or bash outputs:



          1
          2


          zsh:



          $ zsh -c 'zmodload zsh/param/private
          f() { private a=1; g; echo $a;}
          g() { echo $a; a=2; }
          a=0; f'
          0
          1


          To be able to use local scope in code portable to bash, zsh, ksh88 ksh93, pdksh, yash or dash/FreeBSD sh, you could do:



          [ -n "$BASH_VERSION" ] && shopt -s expand_aliases
          alias shdef= kshdef='#'
          if type typeset > /dev/null 2>&1; then
          alias mylocal=typeset
          if (a=1; f() { typeset a=2; }; f; [ "$a" = 2 ]); then
          alias shdef='#' kshdef='function'
          fi
          else
          alias mylocal=local
          fi


          And then declare your functions as:



          kshdef foo
          shdef foo()
          {
          mylocal var
          var=value
          ...
          }


          In any case, there are many differences between the behaviour of those local in the various shells. Beside the dynamic vs static consideration mentioned above, there's whether variables initially get an unset or empty value or inherit the value from the parent scope. And there's the interaction with readonly, unset, whether local/typeset is a keyword or builtin (affects split+glob handling)...



          There are other implications of using the ksh-style function definition in ksh93, see the man page for details.



          More reading





          • http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=767 for the POSIX effort to standardize local scope in sh.

          • List of shells support `local` keyword for defining local variables






          share|improve this answer


























          • Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:42











          • @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:43






          • 1





            @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 10:08











          • I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 5 '17 at 15:36
















          10












          10








          10







          typeset is ksh93's private (using static scoping like perl's my, not local which does dynamic scoping) only for functions that are declared using the ksh function definition style:



          function foo {
          typeset var=whatever
          ...
          }


          With the Bourne syntax (or with the . command (which btw, can also be used on ksh-style functions)), there's no scoping (except for $1, $2... $# of course). So one can use Bourne-style functions to get the value or change the value or type of a variable in the parent context (though typeset -n can also be used for that with the ksh-style.



          In ksh88, typeset was doing dynamic scoping with both the ksh and Bourne function definition style. According to David Korn, POSIX did not specify ksh's variable scoping on the basis that it was dynamic (deemed inferior) which is why he changed it to static scoping for ksh93 (a complete rewrite).



          But in the mean time, other shells have implemented variable scoping and they all did it using dynamic scoping to mimic ksh88's.



          zsh now has a private keyword to have scoping similar to ksh93's in addition to local/typeset with dynamic scoping like in ksh88.



          To see the difference between static and dynamic scoping, compare:



          "$shell" -c 'function f { typeset a=1; g; echo "$a"; }
          function g { echo "$a"; a=2; }
          a=0; f'


          Which with $shell == ksh93 outputs:



          0
          1


          And with ksh88 or bash outputs:



          1
          2


          zsh:



          $ zsh -c 'zmodload zsh/param/private
          f() { private a=1; g; echo $a;}
          g() { echo $a; a=2; }
          a=0; f'
          0
          1


          To be able to use local scope in code portable to bash, zsh, ksh88 ksh93, pdksh, yash or dash/FreeBSD sh, you could do:



          [ -n "$BASH_VERSION" ] && shopt -s expand_aliases
          alias shdef= kshdef='#'
          if type typeset > /dev/null 2>&1; then
          alias mylocal=typeset
          if (a=1; f() { typeset a=2; }; f; [ "$a" = 2 ]); then
          alias shdef='#' kshdef='function'
          fi
          else
          alias mylocal=local
          fi


          And then declare your functions as:



          kshdef foo
          shdef foo()
          {
          mylocal var
          var=value
          ...
          }


          In any case, there are many differences between the behaviour of those local in the various shells. Beside the dynamic vs static consideration mentioned above, there's whether variables initially get an unset or empty value or inherit the value from the parent scope. And there's the interaction with readonly, unset, whether local/typeset is a keyword or builtin (affects split+glob handling)...



          There are other implications of using the ksh-style function definition in ksh93, see the man page for details.



          More reading





          • http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=767 for the POSIX effort to standardize local scope in sh.

          • List of shells support `local` keyword for defining local variables






          share|improve this answer















          typeset is ksh93's private (using static scoping like perl's my, not local which does dynamic scoping) only for functions that are declared using the ksh function definition style:



          function foo {
          typeset var=whatever
          ...
          }


          With the Bourne syntax (or with the . command (which btw, can also be used on ksh-style functions)), there's no scoping (except for $1, $2... $# of course). So one can use Bourne-style functions to get the value or change the value or type of a variable in the parent context (though typeset -n can also be used for that with the ksh-style.



          In ksh88, typeset was doing dynamic scoping with both the ksh and Bourne function definition style. According to David Korn, POSIX did not specify ksh's variable scoping on the basis that it was dynamic (deemed inferior) which is why he changed it to static scoping for ksh93 (a complete rewrite).



          But in the mean time, other shells have implemented variable scoping and they all did it using dynamic scoping to mimic ksh88's.



          zsh now has a private keyword to have scoping similar to ksh93's in addition to local/typeset with dynamic scoping like in ksh88.



          To see the difference between static and dynamic scoping, compare:



          "$shell" -c 'function f { typeset a=1; g; echo "$a"; }
          function g { echo "$a"; a=2; }
          a=0; f'


          Which with $shell == ksh93 outputs:



          0
          1


          And with ksh88 or bash outputs:



          1
          2


          zsh:



          $ zsh -c 'zmodload zsh/param/private
          f() { private a=1; g; echo $a;}
          g() { echo $a; a=2; }
          a=0; f'
          0
          1


          To be able to use local scope in code portable to bash, zsh, ksh88 ksh93, pdksh, yash or dash/FreeBSD sh, you could do:



          [ -n "$BASH_VERSION" ] && shopt -s expand_aliases
          alias shdef= kshdef='#'
          if type typeset > /dev/null 2>&1; then
          alias mylocal=typeset
          if (a=1; f() { typeset a=2; }; f; [ "$a" = 2 ]); then
          alias shdef='#' kshdef='function'
          fi
          else
          alias mylocal=local
          fi


          And then declare your functions as:



          kshdef foo
          shdef foo()
          {
          mylocal var
          var=value
          ...
          }


          In any case, there are many differences between the behaviour of those local in the various shells. Beside the dynamic vs static consideration mentioned above, there's whether variables initially get an unset or empty value or inherit the value from the parent scope. And there's the interaction with readonly, unset, whether local/typeset is a keyword or builtin (affects split+glob handling)...



          There are other implications of using the ksh-style function definition in ksh93, see the man page for details.



          More reading





          • http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=767 for the POSIX effort to standardize local scope in sh.

          • List of shells support `local` keyword for defining local variables







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 6 mins ago

























          answered Jul 4 '17 at 9:31









          Stéphane ChazelasStéphane Chazelas

          303k56570924




          303k56570924













          • Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:42











          • @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:43






          • 1





            @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 10:08











          • I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 5 '17 at 15:36





















          • Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:42











          • @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 9:43






          • 1





            @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

            – Stéphane Chazelas
            Jul 4 '17 at 10:08











          • I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

            – PSkocik
            Jul 5 '17 at 15:36



















          Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

          – PSkocik
          Jul 4 '17 at 9:42





          Thanks. Do you know if it's possible to get the same effect as local in ksh93 in without the function-based function definitions? The reason I'm asking is I have a bunch of mostly POSIX code except with local variables and so I thought I'd make it more portable by replacing the local declarations with eval $current_shells_local_keyword $the_variables.

          – PSkocik
          Jul 4 '17 at 9:42













          @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Jul 4 '17 at 9:43





          @PSkocik, you may want to have a look at github.com/modernish/modernish

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Jul 4 '17 at 9:43




          1




          1





          @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Jul 4 '17 at 10:08





          @PSkocik, see edit for one approach.

          – Stéphane Chazelas
          Jul 4 '17 at 10:08













          I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

          – PSkocik
          Jul 5 '17 at 15:36







          I like your approach but ksh support wasn't essential, and I ended up ignoring it and simply doing alias local=typeset for yash. With that, my code appears to be correct in dash, bash, yash, posh, and zsh, as long as I don't rely on a specific type of scoping, the local values being auto-initialized to empty (in some shells they aren't), and on local being a keyword ( local a=$b is nonportable but local a="$b" or local a; a=$b appears to work across all the shells). Thanks for the help.

          – PSkocik
          Jul 5 '17 at 15:36




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f375156%2ftypeset-in-ksh93-not-working-as-expected%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Loup dans la culture

          How to solve the problem of ntp “Unable to contact time server” from KDE?

          ASUS Zenbook UX433/UX333 — Configure Touchpad-embedded numpad on Linux