Joerg Pernfuss wrote:
/bin/sh is actually an ash. Minimal POSIX sh with a few additions that
don't help it anyway near a friendly shell for interactive use.
With "set -o emacs" or "set -o vi", and the existence of job control, sh
is a perfectly adequate *root* shell, IMHO - though I'm a csh
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 08:03:02 -0500
Martin McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
> default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
> quit using csh about twelve years ago and so am a little rusty
> about the finer deta
On 2006-10-19 15:30, Martin McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Zbyslaw writes:
> > set prompt="hello%{^G%}there "
> >
> > where ^G is a single control char, not two chars.
>
> Thanks. It works perfectly. I am reading the man for
> tcsh again to attempt to figure out what I missed
Alex Zbyslaw writes:
> set prompt="hello%{^G%}there "
>
> where ^G is a single control char, not two chars.
Thanks. It works perfectly. I am reading the man for
tcsh again to attempt to figure out what I missed the first time.
___
freebsd-ques
On 2006-10-19 11:48, Martin McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RW writes:
> > There is an alternative uid 0 user called toor which you can use if you
> > want
> > to use bash as root. OTOH hand there is a school of thought that you
> > shouldn't be too comfortable as root.
>
> My thanks
Martin McCormick wrote:
One thing I was trying to accomplish is to have a bell in
the root prompt. In the .cshrc file is a string
set prompt="\007\!# "
I have also tried replacing the \007 with the actual
Control-G and even a \a. All produce an attempt to render a bell
but
RW writes:
> There is an alternative uid 0 user called toor which you can use if you
> want
> to use bash as root. OTOH hand there is a school of thought that you
> shouldn't be too comfortable as root.
My thanks to all. On all the systems in question, bash
ends up on the same partition
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:20:14AM -0400, Jonathan Arnold wrote:
> Martin McCormick wrote:
> > Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
> >default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
>
> The stock answer is that bash is not guaranteed to be available,
> as
On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 08:03:02AM -0500, Martin McCormick wrote:
> Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
> default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
> quit using csh about twelve years ago and so am a little rusty
> about the finer details when I co
On Thursday 19 October 2006 14:03, Martin McCormick wrote:
> Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
> default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
> quit using csh about twelve years ago and so am a little rusty
> about the finer details when I come acros
Martin McCormick wrote:
Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
The stock answer is that bash is not guaranteed to be available,
as it is neither in the standard installation package, nor is it
on the / pa
Is there any particular reason why FreeBSD has csh as the
default root shell? Nothing really wrong with it except that I
quit using csh about twelve years ago and so am a little rusty
about the finer details when I come across a csh shell. On a
number of FreeBSD4.x systems, I used chsh to
12 matches
Mail list logo
