Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!killer!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpcvca!charles
From: charles@hpcvca.HP.COM (Charles Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: csh on minix
Message-ID: <5870006@hpcvca.HP.COM>
Date: 25 Sep 88 21:08:04 GMT
References: <6173@galbp.LBP.HARRIS.COM>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, Oregon
Lines: 34

>>>::> I want to put csh on my minix.
>>>:: Why on Earth would anyone want to clone that mess? :-)
>>> Because they're smart?
>>No.  Because they've never used ksh.
>- Because they're used to csh from another system.

We had several hold-outs here for almost a year.  When they finally
converted, inevitably they said "Why did I wait so long?  What a waste!"

>- Because they have lots of csh scripts that they'd rather not convert.

That consists of inserting
	#!/bin/csh
as the first line.  No problem.

>- Because they like the way csh does some things (history, for instance).

This tells me you have never used ksh.  The history in ksh is clearly
superior to csh.
1. Who wants to use a bizzare sequence of characters to specify using
portions of the previous line when you can simply edit that line in
place using your favorite editor's commands?
2. Csh's history is remembered as long as that shell history lasts.
Ksh's history is remembered as long as you don't remove the history
file.

>- Because it's there.
>	Steven Grimm		Moderator, comp.{sources,binaries}.atari.st

Is it?  Where?  If we do not have csh sources, then it makes far more
sense to take sh (which clearly DOES exit) and modify it to make it as
powerful as ksh.  
	Charles Brown
Not representing my employer.