On Thu 19 Oct 2006 at 04:54AM, Roland Mainz wrote:
> Dan Price wrote:
> [snip]
> > My thought is that we should revamp all of the interactive shell defaults
> > to have consistent (across the shells) and excellent default interactive
> > settings, with useful prompts and default behaviors whereever possible.
> > And yes, we should do so judiciously, with all due deliberation. Would
> > you defend:
> >
> > bash-3.00$ (bash)
> >
> > or
> >
> > > (tcsh)
> >
> > as a reasonable default prompt for a shell suitable for an interactive
> > user? "bash-3.00$" is the kind of crapola we wind up with when we follow
> > the policy of "none" (bash and tcsh shown, respectively).
>
> I agree that an unified and plugable configuration for the shells would
I just want to be clear about what we're agreeing to.
I think you've might have changed my comment about usability and
consistency into "unified configuration"-- I just want the shells to
behave (defauly prompts, default editing modes) roughly the same.
Somehow implementing it all as a single file isn't very interesting to
me. I mean, feel free, but I don't personally care either way.
-dp
--
Daniel Price - Solaris Kernel Engineering - dp at eng.sun.com - blogs.sun.com/dp
