Re: Sysinst default root login shell

[David Holland <dholland-current%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 02:19:39PM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
 > >  >  and I think we are talking about the login shell, and not the shell
 > >  >  language...
 > >
 > >They're not unconnected though.
 > 
 > I fail to see much of a connection. I use tcsh, but I would not
 > dream of writing scripts in csh or tcsh because of that. I use sh
 > if I need that.

Sure. But sooner or later you find that you want to write "for x in
..." in your login session and remember that you have to do it in the
broken csh way.

 > >  >  I'd say even csh is nicer than sh as an interactive shell.
 >
 > >The genuine Bourne shell, yes; not our sh, which has uses libedit and
 > >supports filename completion. Granted, the editing in sh does have
 > >some rough edges; but csh has no editing at all.
 > 
 > csh supports filename completion as well. But right, it does not
 > have line editing. But it do have editing, in the form of history
 > substitution. 

That is not "editing" by any meaningful definition of the word.

 > And it do have job control (mentioned in another mail
 > as something it didn't have).

So does sh.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost