Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: "Hannu E K Nevalainen" <garbage_collector AT telia DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: RE: ash does not understand '~'
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 22:39:39 +0200
Message-ID: <NGBBLLIAMFLGJEOAJCCEKEHKDFAA.garbage_collector@telia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
In-Reply-To: <bmpf7i$el2$1@sea.gmane.org>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Importance: Normal

> From: Andrew DeFaria
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:20 PM

> Hannu E K Nevalainen wrote:
>
> >>From: Andrew DeFaria
> >>Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 5:36 PM
> >>
> >OS wars begin(?) - Please, do not!
> >
> >>Non-protable to such "OSes" that don't have a more modern shell
> then Bourne/Ash I guess. Are there any "OSes" that don't support
> shells like csh, tcsh, ksh, bash?
> >>
SNIP
> >bash, and might I guess - most of those above, are/is littered
> with fork() calls IIUC (I have not looked).
> >
> >I'm not too sure if fork()-use is to be considered "state of the
> art" and thus make a containing project be considered "modern".
> Without really knowing I would have thought better of such
> projects if they'd used pthreads or some such instead. [ This
> statement is based on "basic OS theory" taught at university
> college in Sweden at least ]
> >
> >IMO your "modern shell" statement above is about the same as was
> stating "DOS compatible" a number of years ago. [BG: 640K ought
> to be enough...]

SNIP
> I'm not that concerned about Amiga OS.

 I'm not surprised.

 Did you even read what I've left unsnipped above, which was my main point.
The Amiga references was given as an _example_ of an OS where bash et al are
_HARD_ to port, others may well exists, this was the one *I* knew about.

> Honestly I don't know much about it. Is it even Unix like?

 More so than D.O.S. (i.e. cmd/command) is. Given the contents of
geekgadgets the "unix-likeness" is or could be at the same level as cygwin
provides - in some areas better, others lesser. ('could be' as the
development has "stopped")

 Well - whatever, this os OT. :-] lets stop it.

/Hannu E K Nevalainen, B.Sc. EE - 59?16.37'N, 17?12.60'E
-- printf("Timezone: %s\n", (DST)?"UTC+02":"UTC+01"); --
--END OF MESSAGE--


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/