Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:15:09 +0100 (CET) From: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@webgiro.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org> Cc: small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sash as a shell replacement ? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.20.0101110011360.61221-100000@mx.webgiro.com> In-Reply-To: <200101102211.f0AMBBS48285@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > hi, > i have been trying to use "sash" as a replacement for "sh" > and other utilities, but it seems problematic. Basically, > sash does not handle things like > > sh some_script_name [ arguments ] > > nor can be invoked with a different name to implement one of > the embedded commands. Does anyone else have a better experience, > or can suggest some patches ? sash has very poor shell functionality. I would suggest using Minix sh which is very Bourne-like, and is also very small. BTW. if someone has the time and inclination to make a couple of ports for useful small Minix programs, I can provide the patches to make them run under FreeBSD. Andrzej Bialecki // <abial@webgiro.com> WebGiro AB, Sweden (http://www.webgiro.com) // ------------------------------------------------------------------- // ------ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve. http://www.freebsd.org -------- // --- Small & Embedded FreeBSD: http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ ---- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.20.0101110011360.61221-100000>