Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 23:46:34 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: "Eli K. Breen" <bsd@unixforge.net> Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/87351: Jail building instructions don't work as described with default CSH shell Message-ID: <20051026204634.GA42792@flame.pc> In-Reply-To: <435FE939.6070203@unixforge.net> References: <200510262020.j9QKKv4Q073769@freefall.freebsd.org> <435FE939.6070203@unixforge.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2005-10-26 13:38, "Eli K. Breen" <bsd@unixforge.net> wrote: > Call me madcap, but wouldn't it make more sense to have the base case > example match the default shell, with exceptions for other shells as the > side-comments? > Given how little of this script/instructions need to change to suit csh, > something like... > > [...] > #For csh > set D=/here/is/the/jail > #For bourne shells (sh,bash,...) > D=/here/is/the/jail > cd /usr/src > mkdir -p $D > [...] > > or > > [...] > #For csh > set D=/here/is/the/jail > #For bourne shells (sh,bash,...) > # D=/here/is/the/jail > cd /usr/src > mkdir -p $D > [...] Nope. csh(1) is terrible for scripting and only mildly annoying for interactive use. I'd accept something that lists *two* sets of commands that can be copied to a file and minimally changed to alter the $D path, but intermixing scripts that run in sh(1), csh(1), zsh(1) or anything else is not very nice imho :/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051026204634.GA42792>