Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:20:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Oliver Fromme <olli@secnetix.de> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing... Message-ID: <200108261120.NAA07025@lurza.secnetix.de> In-Reply-To: <20010826015413.C92548@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien <dev-null@nuxi.com> wrote:
> > _But_ my vote would be for still having a "real" csh in
> > /bin, additionally. (And don't tell me that tcsh is a
> > real csh -- it's not, see below.)
>
> By chance have you looked at the csh source in the CSRG SCCS files?
> How about the tcsh sources from "day 1" in its CVS repository?
> Tcsh *is* a direct decendent of CSRG csh. Christos Zulas maintined the
> CSRG csh in the 4.4 days.
No doubt about that, but that's not the point. Did you
read what i wrote further down in my message (what I
referred to by "see below")?
"Our" csh still behaves differently like any /bin/csh on
any other system that I know, and can't be easily made to
behave like them.
When I wrote "real csh", I meant a csh which exhibits the
traditional behaviour and user interface ("look and feel",
if you prefer) of a csh. tcsh does not. Someone used to
work with a "real csh" simply can't be happy with tcsh,
especially if he has to change frequently between using
FreeBSD and other systems. It's a real PITA.
Regards
Oliver
--
Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co KG, Oettingenstr. 2, 80538 München
Any opinions expressed in this message may be personal to the author
and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of secnetix in any way.
"All that we see or seem is just a dream within a dream" (E. A. Poe)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200108261120.NAA07025>