🚀 go-pugleaf

bazyar@teal.csn.org (Jawaid Bazyar) writes:

>henigan@quando.quantum.de (Kevin Henigan) writes:
>>The new version of gsh will support if/then/else etc... is it compatible
>>enough to unpack un*x shar files or to run un*x sh scripts.

>  No; gsh is based on csh, and always will be.  All Hail the High Grandeur
>of Bill Joy!

Just a question (as the subject line says), why did you go with 'csh'
compatibility in the first place?  Unix csh is broken (as far as
programming the thing goes.  Its command line interface works fine,
except that it lacks command line editing and most versions I've
played with don't have filename completion working).  The other
shells like ksh, bash, etc are better...  Of course, this is just an
interest-based question since you're obviously not going to change it
now.

I don't own GNO so I'm also wondering how tightly coupled is the GNO
kernel to the 'gsh' shell?  Can it be replaced with something else or
would you have to start up another shell from inside it.  It would be
cool to have 'chsh /bin/ksh' work in GNO.

>  But seriously, I've got code for an sh clone, and will finish a port
>as soon as I add more robust UNIX-style fork() support to GNO.  I'll
>actually be adding vfork(), which the sh clone can be modified to use
>instead of regular UNIX fork.

Sounds good.
-- 
Jerry Penner   jpenne@ee.ualberta.ca   Try a 1-line .sig today.