Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 21:38:20 -0600 From: Adam Fabian <afabian@austin.rr.com> To: Michael Madden <madden@cmsrtp.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Programming with Bourne or C shell Message-ID: <20050101033820.GA602@turingmachine.mentalsiege.net> In-Reply-To: <20050101032022.GA1890@cmsrtp.com> References: <20050101032022.GA1890@cmsrtp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 09:20:22PM -0600, Michael Madden wrote: > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/ > > Are most FreeBSD users still using csh or tcsh has their interactive > shell and sh for programming? I think it would be nice to use the > same interactive and programming shell for consistency. It's been my impression (in other words, this is all speculation based on my statistically-insignificant interaction with other FreeBSD users, reading the mailing list, etc.) that most FreeBSD users have Bourne shells (bash, ksh93, pdksh) for interactive use and scripting. Old-school users occasionally use tcsh for interactive use, and almost no one scripts anything with csh/tcsh. I wouldn't read too much into the defaults of any program. Lots of good UNIX programs have relatively poor defaults, in my experience. In any case, you will always have some Bourne-based shell on anything vaguely UNIX-ish, but may not have a csh-based shell. -- Adam Fabian (afabian@austin.rr.com)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050101033820.GA602>