Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Aug 2001 17:44:00 -0500
From:      Jim Bryant <kc5vdj@yahoo.com>
To:        tlambert2@mindspring.com
Cc:        "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, Oliver Fromme <olli@secnetix.de>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why is csh tcsh?  This can be a bad thing...
Message-ID:  <3B897BB0.5070109@yahoo.com>
References:  <20010826015413.C92548@dragon.nuxi.com> <200108261120.NAA07025@lurza.secnetix.de> <20010826154728.A19673@nagual.pp.ru> <3B8966C8.46BD4F84@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert wrote:

> I was still grumpy about the change, but that at least was
> enough to mollify me into not objecting loudly and persitantly
> up to the import.
> 
> Let me get this straight, though:  _now_ you are saying that
> the system wide defaults and account template defaults will
> be whatever the tcsh maintainers say they are, and that any
> changes that the tcsh maintainers make with instantly and
> magically be imported into FreeBSD?
> 
> I think there are a few logic flaws in your plan to have
> people submit their gripes about the defaults to the tcsh
> maintainers:
> 
> 1)	They set their defaults the way they like them, and
> 	are unlikely to change.
> 2)	A lot of the people who shut up did so on the premise
> 	that the defaults would cause tcsh to behave like csh
> 	when invoked with that name, and that it was the tcsh
> 	users, NOT the csh users, who would have to change
> 	away from the system defaults to get their desired
> 	behaviour.
> 3)	FreeBSD does not seem to track tcsh changes quickly
> 	or religiously enough for a lobbying effort to really
> 	be effective.
> 
> While we may be stuck with this bait-and-switch "upgrade", I
> think his complaints are not co easily addressed.  Certainly,
> the "exec" complaint remains valid, in any case: it's a bug
> that csh didn't have.


Terry, first things first, or is it last things first...  I had issued myself a boot to the head because I had simply forgotten to 
background the startx and issue a logout [been so long since i've done things this way, blah blah blah, boot to the head], This was 
the second message in this thread, and I asked people to disregard my initial post because of this, shortly after sending the 
initial message.  Since then, this has taken a life of it's own.

After reading the ensuing posts, I do have to say that although I don't agree with a lot of the posts against adding more 
defacto-standard shells to the base distribution [remember the thread about a month ago], I at least now understand one of the base 
arguments behind the arguments against.  I'm not trying to revive that topic, I'm just saying I see what was behind some of the 
arguments in that thread now.

Anyhow, I have other things on my mind right now, such as why installworld is expecting a user named 'bind'...

jim
-- 
ET has one helluva sense of humor!
He's always anal-probing right-wing schizos!


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


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?3B897BB0.5070109>