Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 19:08:44 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net> To: Studded <Studded@gorean.org> Cc: Brian Feldman <green@zone.syracuse.net>, "Dag-Erling C. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=" <dag-erli@ifi.uio.no>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sh and ~ expansion Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9810251853310.375-100000@picnic.mat.net> In-Reply-To: <3633B5A2.F1068A0F@gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 25 Oct 1998, Studded wrote: > And so it begins... No, you're the one trying to turn this into "holy war". You bragged about bash, and promptly said anyone who replies to your comments at all is flaming. This isn't a shell fight, it's a hunt for sh compatibility only, so any bragging about shells is misdirected. We're not picking a standard shell here, we're picking (probably have picked, negatively) a possible ash replacement. ash? That's the sh we're using now. I am not a pdksh fan myself, but I recognize it as a superior shell than sh IF IT HAS COMPATIBILITY. I'd say that same thing about bash, except bash isn't sh compatible. I am not here championing any one shell. You've done all the "holy war" talk, please don't start that. The pdksh man page says it's compatible with sh. Tor Egge brought up some bugs, which were enought to make me rethink. The nice thing about pdksh is, statically linked, it's smaller than our sh, and it's got extra features that are neat. If it's got bugs or is incompatible, it's outta here. I am solely interested in NOT breaking sh compatibility here with FreeBSD. As far as sh goes, that's my only interest, and bash breaks that real well. Posix does too, I understand. I am not going to argue any shell's features *beyond* sh compatiblity. I've never heard of various flavors or sh, it's all the Bourne shell. If you've got any comment about THAT, I'd love to hear it, I've never heard of multiple versions of sh. Teach me. I use tcsh myself, and you aren't going to get me to ask for that one, it would be utterly ridiculous. > Finally, this is one of those holy wars that I really wasn't interested > in touching off, namely the "My shell is better than your shell" bit. > I'm sure that all of you pdksh people are happy with your shell, and > more power to you. But if we're going to seriously consider replacing sh > we need hard data to work with, not generalizations. > > -- > *** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network *** > > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@glue.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (NetBSD). ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9810251853310.375-100000>