Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!andy
From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: WorkBench Dreams
Keywords: I wish..
Message-ID: <5475@cbmvax.UUCP>
Date: 9 Dec 88 17:08:38 GMT
References: <720@pdp.cs.OHIOU.EDU>
Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 18

In article <720@pdp.cs.OHIOU.EDU> arp@pdp.cs.OHIOU.EDU (John Gordos) writes:
>	And, IMHO, the shell's use of run and aliases is busted; If
>	you are running a shell and use run to "spawn" a new process,
>	it should spawn a shell, and not a cli.   It's important to
>	present a consistent interface to an end user.  I *know* why

When you use run to spawn a new process from the shell, the new process
you get *is* a shell.  However, aliases (at the moment) are not inherited
by child shells.
-- 
andy finkel		{uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy
Commodore-Amiga, Inc.

"Possibly this is a new usage of the word 'compatible' with which
 I was previously unfamiliar"

Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share.
I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.