On Thu 2000-09-07 (19:54), Eric P. Scott wrote:
> csh is my interactive shell of choice, and tcsh is just different
> enough to cause serious transition shock.
What exact transition problems have you experienced? I'm sure if you
actually contributed a list of changes, I can generate a csh.cshrc
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 07:54:17PM -0700, Eric P. Scott wrote:
[snip]
> What individuals choose as defaults for their personal accounts
> is their business. I don't see a problem with having sh, ksh,
> zsh, bash, csh, tcsh, _whatever_ available. But I stand by my
> opinion that replacing csh wi
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 07:54:17PM -0700, Eric P. Scott wrote:
> What individuals choose as defaults for their personal accounts
> is their business. I don't see a problem with having sh, ksh,
> zsh, bash, csh, tcsh, _whatever_ available. But I stand by my
> opinion that replacing csh with tcsh
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Eric P. Scott wrote:
> [Neil Blakey-Milner]
> >tcsh is fully csh-compatible.
>
> No, it isn't. And not including a 44bsd-csh package on
> 4.1-RELEASE's CD #1 (note that 44bsd-more is there) was downright
> malicious.
Yes, we did it to deliberately screw with your life.
:-)
[Neil Blakey-Milner]
>tcsh is fully csh-compatible.
No, it isn't. And not including a 44bsd-csh package on
4.1-RELEASE's CD #1 (note that 44bsd-more is there) was downright
malicious.
-=EPS=-
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscr
On Wed 2000-09-06 (05:22), Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote:
> If you build with this option and remove /bin/(t)csh, buildworld will die
> when /usr/bin/vgrind is called like so:
Well, this is obvious. You can't remove /bin/sh either.
> However, I thought all shell scripts were supposed to be Bourne.
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 05:22:42AM -0500, Jeffrey J. Mountin wrote:
> However, I thought all shell scripts were supposed to be Bourne. This is
Why? Most of my personal scripts are for csh. Just because I like it.
And csh is default shell for root. And having csh is RIGHT THING in BSD.
--
Igor
