Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 02:44:29 +1300 From: Joe Abley <jabley@clear.co.nz> To: Dom Mitchell <Dom.Mitchell@palmerharvey.co.uk> Cc: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com>, Alex Zepeda <garbanzo@hooked.net>, Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, alk@pobox.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, jabley@clear.co.nz Subject: Re: base64 Message-ID: <19990309024429.A95913@clear.co.nz> In-Reply-To: <E10JzYg-0000BK-00@voodoo.pandhm.co.uk>; from Dom Mitchell on Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 12:54:58PM %2B0000 References: <36E3BDAD.D23D5E5B@newsguy.com> <E10JzYg-0000BK-00@voodoo.pandhm.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 12:54:58PM +0000, Dom Mitchell wrote: > On 8 March 1999, "Daniel C. Sobral" proclaimed: > > metamail. > > No. Not unless you want to rewrite all of metamail's scripts in bourne > syntax. I smell a religious issue, but what the hell... ... what's wrong with csh? We have csh in the tree. It's in the root filesystem. Although I have certainly written bourne scripts galore, I tend to write ad-hoc scripts in csh because that's what I use as my shell, and hence that's what any interactive scripts are written in. What's so great about sh? <duck> Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990309024429.A95913>