On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, Igor Sobrado wrote:
> I am really happy with ksh(1) in NetBSD.  I think that sh(1), ksh(1)
> and csh(1) are all required shells.  I have a friend in the Department
> of Mathematics that uses tcsh too.  IMHO, ksh(1) is a shell that
> provides the nice features of bash(1) without its complex or incompatible
> features.  It is powerful and, at same time, simple.

The unfortunate thing is that NetBSD's ksh is pdksh which has a number of 
features that are not available in other ksh implementations - if it was 
the same everywhere, I'd immetiately switch to it.


  - Hubert