From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Apr 6 18:59:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCA337BD3D for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 18:59:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA12645 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 04:03:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id DAA34803 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 03:59:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dt051n0b.san.rr.com (dt051n0b.san.rr.com [204.210.32.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF6A37C1F1; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 18:59:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Received: from slave (doug@slave [10.0.0.1]) by dt051n0b.san.rr.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA38723; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 18:59:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Doug@gorean.org) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 18:59:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton X-Sender: doug@dt051n0b.san.rr.com To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: obrien@freebsd.org, Nate Williams , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Import of tcsh into src/contrib/, replacing src/usr.bin/csh In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 6 Apr 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > I don't think that is necessary and needlessly bloats people's > /usr/src by having two copies of almost identical source. > > My recommendation (as a Core-team member in charge of the ports > collection) would be to make csh a port, linked statically by default > with an option to install it in /bin, so embedded systems people who > need csh rather than tcsh to be on their systems can easily get it. If I were working on an embedded system, the very first thing I'd chuck is csh. Nothing in the base depends on it being there, as opposed to /bin/sh which many things depend on. If you _have_ to have one, and you dno't have to have the other, it's a no brainer. I don't use csh at all (I even change my root shells to /bin/sh) so I can't really comment on the usability issue. However if the following things are all true, 1. There is no (ok, 99% of no) danger that it will break something important. 2. It's under the BSD license. 3. It's actively maintained. 4. Someone is willing to take responsibility for keeping it up to date. Then I don't see any reason not to import it. As for pedantry, I'm just as pedantic as the next person when it comes to shell scripting (witness my recent suggestions for dot.profile) but no one who writes scripts that have to be portable uses csh anyway. And no, that's not flame bait. Cruise through comp.unix.shell sometime if you don't believe me. Any additional resistance on this point can easily be overcome by David assuring everyone that he will properly comment on the non-portable elements in the man page. Doug -- Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. -- W. Somerset Maugham To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message