From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Dec 29 13:28:28 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.243.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E9E9156D2 for ; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 13:28:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA13803 for freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:28:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:28:21 +0100 (CET) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <199912292128.WAA13803@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cons25 && (midc, /stand/sysinstall, etc) Organization: Administration TU Clausthal Reply-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 RZTUC(3) PL2] Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Duke Normandin wrote in list.freebsd-questions: > From: Oliver Fromme > >If you want the screen to be cleared and repainted in your > >colors, maybe you should append ``clear'' after the vidcontrol > >command in the script. > > That's what I wanted -- and did, prior to my post. It now works as I > expected. I just assumed that ' midc "$@" ' would have done it all. Case > closed!! Nice to hear that. > >No. You don't write scripts in csh; it's evil. :-) > > An "evil" shell as the default for root? Can't help the learning curve, > can it! :-) No, writing scripts in csh is evil. Whether using csh as an interactive shell is evil, is debatable... I think the fact that root's login shell is a csh has mainly historical (hysterical...) reasons. Personally, I have an alias "su" --> "su -m", so I get the same shell as root that i have as normal user (which happens to be zsh), without having to change root's login shell in the passwd file (which could have undesirable side effects). A "bare bones" FreeBSD only has sh and csh, and of those two I'd definitely prefer sh (for example in single-user mode, I always use sh, not csh). It has history and line-editing features, so there's really no reason to resort to csh's crappyness. Well OK, sh is missing a filename completion... Hoping not to start a flamewar... :-) Regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, Leibnizstr. 18/61, 38678 Clausthal, Germany (Info: finger userinfo:olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) "In jedem Stück Kohle wartet ein Diamant auf seine Geburt" (Terry Pratchett) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message