From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Apr 6 14:51:15 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 F058737BDB6 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 14:51:09 -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 XAA10461 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 23:54:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id XAA34042 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 23:51:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.79.126]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C0C37C0ED; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 14:50:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.79.115]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA24994; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:50:49 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA24400; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:50:49 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:50:49 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200004062150.PAA24400@nomad.yogotech.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: Nate Williams , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Import of tcsh into src/contrib/, replacing src/usr.bin/csh In-Reply-To: <20000406144502.A25177@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20000406134916.A23265@dragon.nuxi.com> <200004062121.PAA24162@nomad.yogotech.com> <20000406144502.A25177@dragon.nuxi.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [ Last reply on this, honest. I've said my piece ] > > 2) FreeBSD's base installation is *NOT* intended for you to have a > > completely/fully functional workstaion. > > I don't want a fully functional workstation. I want a root account that > is useful. It's completely useful. It has everything you need. What does tcsh provide you that csh doesn't provide you that is needed for root? > I am also tired of explaining to Linux users why our /bin/csh doesn't > have as nice a UI as tcsh. That's a *really* bad reason to bring in csh, and you know it. > > 3) FreeBSD is often used in embedded systems (see PicoBSD), > > I did see PicoBSD (as I mentioned). Can someone show me where it is > required by PicoBSD? PicoBSD is just *one* of the many, many, many uses for small embedded system. Also, PicoBSD is the framework, not the entire enchilada. > > and csh does the job adequately. > > As would Tcsh. If both are adequate, choose the smaller of the two since it benefits more folks that way. ;) > > There is no *need* for tcsh any more that there is a need to replace sh > > with bash or ksh, or whatever. > > The need is our root's shell is crappy. I disagree, but what's stopping you from using tcsh as root's shell? > > Plus, the additional memory use, since at this point csh uses less > > memory than sh > > Does it? Virtual memory yes, but what about core once running? On PicoBSD and other embedded system, swap is just as precious as real memory. (In some cases, it's even more precious...) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message