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.