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.