Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 07:47:27 -0500 From: Chet Ramey To: cabbey AT bresnanlink DOT net Subject: RE: bash: setenv: command not found Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Reply-To: chet AT po DOT CWRU DOT Edu Message-ID: <1010208124727.AA47875.SM@nike.INS.CWRU.Edu> Read-Receipt-To: chet AT po DOT CWRU DOT Edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-In-Reply-To: Message from cabbey AT bresnanlink DOT net of Wed, 7 Feb 2001 22:42:58 -0600 (CST) (id ) > the answers to your question. > > setenv/unsetenv are commands that are built into the csh family > of shells. Under bash the equivalent built ins are export and > unset. For example: > > CSH: setenv name value > BASH: export name=value > > CSH: unsetenv name > BASH: unset name > > > yes, this is a stupid naming convention, and it's one > of the things I hate the most about shells... every one > has a different version, and different syntax. There > needs to be ONE standard, and I'm sorry to say BASH's > answer isn't an answer; here csh got it right. > Why do you say that csh is right and bash is wrong? -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ( ``Discere est Dolere'' -- chet) Chet Ramey, CWRU chet AT po DOT CWRU DOT Edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/ -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple