At Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:58:48 +0200,
Aryan Ameri wrote:
>
> On Saturday 15 March 2003 03:05, John Hasler wrote:
> > > I know the shortcomings of csh have been discussed
> > > elsewhere in this thread. But tcsh is enhanced csh.
> >
> > I have no problem with csh (or tcsh) as a login shell. It is
>
I wrote:
> I have no problem with csh (or tcsh) as a login shell. It is just not
> suitable for scripting.
Johan Kullstam writes:
> I do. If csh (and tcsh) suck for scripting, then why on earth use them
> as your shell?
I don't.
> If you make them your shell then you have to spend time learnin
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I know the shortcomings of csh have been discussed elsewhere in this
> > thread. But tcsh is enhanced csh.
>
> I have no problem with csh (or tcsh) as a login shell. It is just not
> suitable for scripting.
I do. If csh (and tcsh) suck for scripting,
Aryan Ameri writes:
> OK you guys say that, OOo is bad software because they use csh, and they
> use java to build it. Don't get me wrong, I am a true believer in free
> software, but I guess sometimes, you have to see things from a different
> point of view.
My main objection is not that csh and
On Saturday 15 March 2003 03:05, John Hasler wrote:
> > I know the shortcomings of csh have been discussed elsewhere in this
> > thread. But tcsh is enhanced csh.
>
> I have no problem with csh (or tcsh) as a login shell. It is just not
> suitable for scripting.
>
> > Perhaps you should rephrase y
> I know the shortcomings of csh have been discussed elsewhere in this
> thread. But tcsh is enhanced csh.
I have no problem with csh (or tcsh) as a login shell. It is just not
suitable for scripting.
> Perhaps you should rephrase your complaint to address a more significant
> issue, the presenc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> not all Unix or
> Unix-like (attention SCO) systems use or would use bash.
Nor do they all have csh. But they all have sh. If you want
least-common-denominator portability, use sh and stock Unix commands.
> I have no faith in the quality of the work of developers who w
On 13 Mar 2003 16:40:25 -0600,
John Hasler wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > But I know of at least one big project that uses tcsh
> > scripting, OpenOffice.org.
[...]
> I have no faith in the quality of the work of developers who
> would choose to use csh in their build system. I would o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But I know of at least one big project that uses tcsh
> scripting, OpenOffice.org.
I wrote:
> Thanks for the warning. I had been considering installing it.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Not needed if all you want is to run it.
I have no faith in the quality of the work
On 12 Mar 2003 18:28:52 -0600,
John Hasler wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > But I know of at least one big project that uses tcsh
> > scripting, OpenOffice.org.
>
> Thanks for the warning. I had been considering installing it.
s/installing/compiling
Not needed if all you want is to run
John Hasler wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > But I know of at least one big project that uses tcsh scripting,
> > OpenOffice.org.
>
> Thanks for the warning. I had been considering installing it.
I'm not sure it's required for installation. I don't have csh or tcsh
installed, yet the openo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But I know of at least one big project that uses tcsh scripting,
> OpenOffice.org.
Thanks for the warning. I had been considering installing it.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTE
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 06:45:15AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm not convinced. As the article itself points out, there are
> workarounds for the perceived weaknesses of csh. And why pick on
> the granddaddy, when the grandson is very much alive and kickin?
> I've been using tcsh for both m
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 00:08:19 -0800,
Vineet Kumar wrote:
>
> [1 ]
> Hello,
>
> I think you've already gotten good answers about the book, and
> how bash is derived from bourne, and what ksh and csh are.
>
> While you're learning about the shells, I think it's important
> to keep this in mind:
>
Hello,
I think you've already gotten good answers about the book, and how bash
is derived from bourne, and what ksh and csh are.
While you're learning about the shells, I think it's important to keep
this in mind:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
It's good to learn csh in ord
Aryan writes:
> I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my university's library
> and found a book named "UNIX Shell Programming". The problem is, the book
> is written on 1988, and covers shell programming on Korn, Bourne and the
> C Shell on both AT&T System V and Berkely systems ( I gu
"Aryan" == Aryan Ameri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Aryan> I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my
Aryan> university's library and found a book named "UNIX Shell
Aryan> Programming". The problem is, the book is written on 1988,
Aryan> and covers shell programming on
> Hi There:
>
> This message is not debain related, however as this ML is my best source of
> information, I hope you'll excuse me.
>
> I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my university's library and
> found a book named "UNIX Shell Programming". The problem is, the book is
> wri
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:41:46PM +0200, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> 1 ) Can this book be beneficial for me? or is it so obsolete that it is not
> useful anymore?
Certainly if you use it and the contents does not bore you :-)
> The book shows examples for all of these tree shells. Therefore I wonder
I've got the same book, though unfortunately I got derailed from finishing
it. So take that in consideration.
I think if you dig around on Amazon or Barnes & Noble, you'll be able to
read a variety of reviews and opinions on this and other books. I do that a
lot to help me assess whether or not
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:41:46PM +0200, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> Hi There:
> 1 ) Can this book be beneficial for me? or is it so obsolete that it is not
> usefull anymore?
i would say this makes it even *more* useful. personally, i do all
my scripting in /bin/sh (that's the Bourne shell), because
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:41:46PM +0200, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my university's library and
> found a book named "UNIX Shell Programming". The problem is, the book is
> written on 1988, and covers shell programming on Korn, Bourne and the C Sh
> Obviously, I am using Debian GNU/Linux not System V or BSD, and I use BASH.
> But this is the only book in our library about shell programming. so I
> wonder:
Not exactly what you asked for, but I've found "Advanced Bash-Scripting
Guide" (or actually it's precursor) very usefull. You can find i
On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 10:41, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> Hi There:
>
> This message is not debain related, however as this ML is my best source of
> information, I hope you'll excuse me.
>
> I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my university's library and
> found a book named "UNIX Shell
Hi There:
This message is not debain related, however as this ML is my best source of
information, I hope you'll excuse me.
I want to learn shell programming. Thus I went to my university's library and
found a book named "UNIX Shell Programming". The problem is, the book is
written on 1988, an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Could someone recommend a good Unix/ Linux book to learn the ins and
> outs of the system? It seems that the O'Reilly publishers seem to
> publish some good stuff. I've really enjoyed the Learning GNU Emacs and
> C++. Thanks.
>
> Tom
>
I have "Special Edition, Us
My recommendations (& a lot of other peoples) all from O'Reilly & all
my opinion:
Running Linux - now in it's second edition but I still have the first
- not much changed. It's a really good overview of Linux and IMO the
best book for a new user. Some people like Linux for Dummies but I
can't st
Could someone recommend a good Unix/ Linux book to learn the ins and
outs of the system? It seems that the O'Reilly publishers seem to
publish some good stuff. I've really enjoyed the Learning GNU Emacs and
C++. Thanks.
Also, with dselect how do I download more packages without downloading
ever
28 matches
Mail list logo
