Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 6 Apr 2000 14:45:02 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org>
To:        Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Import of tcsh into src/contrib/, replacing src/usr.bin/csh
Message-ID:  <20000406144502.A25177@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <200004062121.PAA24162@nomad.yogotech.com>; from nate@yogotech.com on Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:21:07PM -0600
References:  <20000406134916.A23265@dragon.nuxi.com> <200004062121.PAA24162@nomad.yogotech.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 03:21:07PM -0600, Nate Williams wrote:
> 2) FreeBSD's base installation is *NOT* intended for you to have a
>    completely/fully functional workstaion.

I don't want a fully functional workstation.  I want a root account that
is useful.  I am also tired of explaining to Linux users why our /bin/csh
doesn't have as nice a UI as tcsh.

> 3) FreeBSD is often used in embedded systems (see PicoBSD),

I did see PicoBSD (as I mentioned).  Can someone show me where it is
required by PicoBSD?

>    and csh does the job adequately.

As would Tcsh.
 
> 4) CSH is provided because it's part of BSD sources, and has been for
>    years and years.  If CSH wasn't part of BSD sources for years, I'd
>    argue for it's removal.  But, the line has to be drawn somewhere, and
>    that's where we've drawn it.

Ok, then I'll take as diff from our csh sources to the tcsh sources.
I'll then commit that diff.  I could easily do that under the guise of
enhancing our csh.  But wait, isn't that what Christos Zoulas has already
done.  Hum, why not just import tcsh and do it the easy way.

> There is no *need* for tcsh any more that there is a need to replace sh
> with bash or ksh, or whatever.

The need is our root's shell is crappy.  Very crappy.  I install enough
boxes from scratch that installing tcsh, adding a user, sudo'ing to root;
in order to get a tolerable shell is annoying.

> Plus, the additional memory use, since at this point csh uses less
> memory than sh

Does it?  Virtual memory yes, but what about core once running?
 
-- 
-- David    (obrien@NUXI.com)




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000406144502.A25177>