On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 03:32:38PM -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
>Jurjen Middendorp wrote:
If you're familiar with pdksh, are you also familiar with ksh93, which
is (I believe) Mr. Korn's own shell? If you are, I would be interessted
in your opinion of the two, any comparisons you migh
On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 19:38 +, Frank Shute wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 07:21:23PM -0500, Tom McLaughlin wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 04:13 +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Frank,
> > >
> > > Now that you mention pdksh, have you tried mksh (in Ports too)?
> > >
> >
Jurjen Middendorp wrote:
If you're familiar with pdksh, are you also familiar with ksh93, which
is (I believe) Mr. Korn's own shell? If you are, I would be interessted
in your opinion of the two, any comparisons you might give.
I've never used ksh93 so I really can't say. There is a NOTES
Michaël Grünewald wrote:
Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
As long as folks don't stop me from running whatever I want, I don't
care if you use bash, but it really irks me, that most Linux systems
are broken in that respect: Most of them break badly in random ways,
if you don't run bash a
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 07:21:23PM -0500, Tom McLaughlin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 04:13 +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > Now that you mention pdksh, have you tried mksh (in Ports too)?
> >
> > I've installed it and successfully run moderately large ksh scripts
>
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 07:33:22PM +0100, Peter Schuller wrote:
>
> > other BSDs for that matter. It being GPL guarantees that quite apart
> > from it general suckiness.
>
> Can someone please explain why bash sucks?
>
> Everyone keep's saying this but I have never heard anyone explain why, other
> other BSDs for that matter. It being GPL guarantees that quite apart
> from it general suckiness.
Can someone please explain why bash sucks?
Everyone keep's saying this but I have never heard anyone explain why, other
than the GPL issue. I really want to know.
(This is not because I'm a bash
On 2007-12-16 19:36, Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael P. Soulier wrote:
>> On 14/12/07 Giorgos Keramidas said:
>>> Tcsh is a fine shell. I'm using it all the time (that's how I found out
>>> that a buglet reported by Kris Kennaway a few months ago was indeed a
>>> bug which I could
On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 11:34:50PM -0500, Tom McLaughlin wrote:
>On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 22:26 -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
>> Tom McLaughlin wrote:
>> >> Now that you mention pdksh, have you tried mksh (in Ports too)?
>> >>
>> >> I've installed it and successfully run moderately large ksh scripts
>> >>
Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As long as folks don't stop me from running whatever I want, I don't
> care if you use bash, but it really irks me, that most Linux systems
> are broken in that respect: Most of them break badly in random ways,
> if you don't run bash as your shell.
A fri
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
On 16/12/07 Chuck Robey said:
There;s one item that is much more easily done in csh/tcsh than in the
sh based ones that's redirecting the stderr along with the stdout.
with tcsh, when I do a make, I commonly do a:
make |& tee makeout
which causes both the std
On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 22:26 -0500, Chuck Robey wrote:
> Tom McLaughlin wrote:
> >> Now that you mention pdksh, have you tried mksh (in Ports too)?
> >>
> >> I've installed it and successfully run moderately large ksh scripts
> >> (like the webrev(1) utility of OpenSolaris), and it is about an order
Tom McLaughlin wrote:
Now that you mention pdksh, have you tried mksh (in Ports too)?
I've installed it and successfully run moderately large ksh scripts
(like the webrev(1) utility of OpenSolaris), and it is about an order of
magnitude smaller than pdksh here:
% [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bi
On 16/12/07 Chuck Robey said:
> There;s one item that is much more easily done in csh/tcsh than in the
> sh based ones that's redirecting the stderr along with the stdout.
> with tcsh, when I do a make, I commonly do a:
>
> make |& tee makeout
>
> which causes both the stdout and stderr
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
On 14/12/07 Giorgos Keramidas said:
Tcsh is a fine shell. I'm using it all the time (that's how I found out
that a buglet reported by Kris Kennaway a few months ago was indeed a
bug which I could reproduce too).
I always found csh/tcsh aliases annoying, since there
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 04:13 +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2007-12-14 21:10, Frank Shute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I used bash for an interactive shell for about 5 years until I
> > discovered the goodness of pdksh. About half the size, statically
> > linked, not full of bugs and better
On 14/12/07 Giorgos Keramidas said:
> Do you have any _particular_ parts of the csh-whynot article that you
> would like to discuss, or this is a free for all flame? :)
It's the lack of shell functions that gets me.
Once a script reaches a certain size, I just move to Perl, Python, Tcl, Ruby,
e
On 14/12/07 Giorgos Keramidas said:
> Tcsh is a fine shell. I'm using it all the time (that's how I found out
> that a buglet reported by Kris Kennaway a few months ago was indeed a
> bug which I could reproduce too).
I always found csh/tcsh aliases annoying, since there are no shell functions.
Frank Shute wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 06:57:09AM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
>>> On December 14, 2007 at 08:03PM Frank Shute wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:00:14PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote:
[ snip ]
> I'm happy
On 2007-12-15 13:54, Frank Shute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> % [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/local/bin$ ls -ld mksh bash ksh
>> % -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel - 684699 Dec 9 19:51 bash
>> % -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel - 2390645 Aug 31 17:07 ksh
>> % -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel - 236202 Dec 9 18:34 mksh
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 06:57:09AM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
>
> > On December 14, 2007 at 08:03PM Frank Shute wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:00:14PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> > >
> > > > On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote:
> > >
> > > [ snip ]
> > >
> > > > I'm h
On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 04:13:49AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>
> On 2007-12-14 21:10, Frank Shute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I used bash for an interactive shell for about 5 years until I
> > discovered the goodness of pdksh. About half the size, statically
> > linked, not full of bugs an
> On December 14, 2007 at 08:03PM Frank Shute wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:00:14PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> >
> > > On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote:
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> > > I'm happy with sh as the system shell though; it's light weight:
> > >
> > > $ ls -l /bi
On 2007-12-14 21:10, Frank Shute <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I used bash for an interactive shell for about 5 years until I
> discovered the goodness of pdksh. About half the size, statically
> linked, not full of bugs and better editing features. Plus it's not
> GPL.
Hi Frank,
Now that you ment
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:00:14PM -0500, Gerard Seibert wrote:
>
> > On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
> > I'm happy with sh as the system shell though; it's light weight:
> >
> > $ ls -l /bin/sh
> > -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 111028 Nov 30 00:10 /bin/sh
> >
> >
> On December 14, 2007 at 04:10PM Frank Shute wrote:
[ snip ]
> I'm happy with sh as the system shell though; it's light weight:
>
> $ ls -l /bin/sh
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 111028 Nov 30 00:10 /bin/sh
>
> $ ls -l /bin/ksh
> -r-xr-xr-x 1 root wheel 681584 Oct 6 12:33 /bin/ksh
>
> How a
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:12:32PM -0500, Mike Jeays wrote:
>
> On December 13, 2007 08:05:42 pm Chad Perrin wrote:
> > I ran across this today:
> >
> > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> >
> > Title:
> > Csh Programming Considered Harmful
> >
> > I wonder what responses I mi
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 02:26:28PM +, RW wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:09:41 -0700
> Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hmm -- fair answer. I was kind of thinking that on FreeBSD I should
> > maybe do such work in csh as the standard shell, but it occurs to me
> > that I'd probabl
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:12:32PM -0500, Mike Jeays wrote:
On December 13, 2007 08:05:42 pm Chad Perrin wrote:
I ran across this today:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Title:
Csh Programming Considered Harmful
I wonder what responses I might
Matt LaPlante wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007 9:59 PM, Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I ran across this today:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Title:
Csh Programming Considered Harmful
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:09:41 -0700
Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm -- fair answer. I was kind of thinking that on FreeBSD I should
> maybe do such work in csh as the standard shell, but it occurs to me
> that I'd probably be pretty hard-pressed to find a FreeBSD system
> without sh o
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 07:42:35PM -0700, Warren Block wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Chad Perrin wrote:
>
> >I ran across this today:
> >
> > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> >
> >Title:
> > Csh Programming Considered Harmful
> >
> >I wonder what responses I might get here, an
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 04:25:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I ran across this today:
> >
> > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> >
> > Title:
> > Csh Programming Considered Harmful
> >
> > I wonder wha
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Jeays
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 5:13 PM
> To: FreeBSD Questions
> Subject: Re: Apparently, csh programming is considered harmful.
>
>
> Bash has all the feature
On 2007-12-13 21:59, Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>> On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I ran across this today:
>>>
>>> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
>>>
>>> Title:
>>> Csh Programming Considered Harmful
>
>
On Dec 13, 2007 9:59 PM, Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I ran across this today:
> >>
> >> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> >>
> >> Title:
> >> Csh Programming Considered
Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I ran across this today:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Title:
Csh Programming Considered Harmful
That was written sometime last millenium, I mean, it's REALLY old. The
question is
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Chad Perrin wrote:
I ran across this today:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Title:
Csh Programming Considered Harmful
I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies to
tcsh as well (I'm still not exactly a tcsh expert).
I li
On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ran across this today:
>
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
>
> Title:
> Csh Programming Considered Harmful
>
> I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies
> to tcsh as well (I'm sti
Jerry McAllister wrote:
Bash has all the features one is likely to need for interactive use
as well, and one could make a good case for it being the 'standard' shell
now.
Yeah, right... when Penguins Fly (hahahaha) [that was intended as a
joke and dumb linux reference]
I find bash to be u
Chad Perrin wrote:
I ran across this today:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Title: Csh Programming Considered Harmful
I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies to
tcsh as well (I'm still not exactly a tcsh expert).
If you really want to troll,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:12:32PM -0500, Mike Jeays wrote:
> On December 13, 2007 08:05:42 pm Chad Perrin wrote:
> > I ran across this today:
> >
> > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> >
> > Title:
> > Csh Programming Considered Harmful
> >
> > I wonder what responses I mig
On December 13, 2007 08:05:42 pm Chad Perrin wrote:
> I ran across this today:
>
> http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
>
> Title:
> Csh Programming Considered Harmful
>
> I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies to
> tcsh as well (I'm still not exac
43 matches
Mail list logo