Date: Sun, 7 Jul 1996 10:09:35 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Pel-Kristian Engstad <engstad AT funcom DOT com>
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: RAMdisk (was: Bug in stubify.c)
In-Reply-To: <31DCC6FA.4E3B@funcom.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960707100638.27552I-100000@is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Pel-Kristian Engstad wrote:

> Alexander Lehmann wrote:
> > Of course, if DOS would support pipes for real, we could just
> > use the -pipe option of gcc and save a lot of tmp storage, but it
> > doesn't.
> 
> Why don't we get smarter by writing 'tcsh' as a shell to Windows? I've
> seen Cygnus' 'bash'. It should be possible to get rid of all references
> to Dos within Win95, or am I wrong?

Actually, Win95 is not that different from DOS on the inside.  The 
appearance is different, but the basic file operations are virtually the 
same.  It is very non-trivial task to port tcsh to DOS or Win95, IMHO (I 
tried once).