Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 01:41:26 +0000 From: Anatoly Vorobey <mellon@pobox.com> To: Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/tcsh - Imported sources Message-ID: <20000416014126.A11471@happy.checkpoint.com> In-Reply-To: <8dap2t$1ome$1@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de>; from naddy@mips.rhein-neckar.de on Sun, Apr 16, 2000 at 12:05:17AM %2B0200 References: <200004150441.VAA23755@freefall.freebsd.org> <8dap2t$1ome$1@bigeye.rhein-neckar.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Apr 16, 2000 at 12:05:17AM +0200, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > David E. O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote: > > > Import the latest version of the 44BSD C-shell -- tcsh-6.09. > > I'm unhappy about this for a reason that hasn't even been mentioned > in the monster thread that clogged -arch: > > Including tcsh in the base system means that people will use it. > csh clearly isn't good enough for people to use, and when they > looked around for a better interactive shell, many found their way > to proper sh-ish shell like bash or ksh. Now they will stay with > tcsh instead. And they will write (t)csh scripts. Importing tcsh > gives new life to a shell family that should die, die, die. I support this completely. I have actually seen that happen many times. Way back when I was young and clueless I have found my way to sh-ish shells from the dark pits of tcsh, and what helped me most was that one system I used had neither tcsh installed, nor quots larged enough for me to compile it. IMHO tcsh(1) in the base system is a Very Bad Thing(TM). -- Anatoly Vorobey, mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/ "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000416014126.A11471>