Xref: utzoo comp.unix.i386:6335 comp.unix.xenix:12259
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali.cs.montana.edu!milton!uw-beaver!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!kevinc
From: kevinc@sequent.UUCP (Kevin Closson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386,comp.unix.xenix
Subject: Re: Xenix vs. UNIX
Message-ID: <37729@sequent.UUCP>
Date: 29 Jun 90 18:09:49 GMT
References: <4716@thebes.Thalatta.COM> <5P7HL3w161w@cdthq>
Reply-To: kevinc@sequent.UUCP (Kevin Closson)
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc
Lines: 52

In article <5P7HL3w161w@cdthq> gary@cdthq (gary) writes:
>campbell@Thalatta.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
>> 
>> Every time I get on a ``pure'' UNIX box I miss Xenix commands
>> like ``copy -romv'' and 'l'.
>
>If you're on a SysV.[23] system, write yourself a bunch of shell
>macros to emulate the commands you miss. I use a bunch, since I


Uhmmmm... good info Gary,  except.... they're "shell functions". Now my
motive here isn't to be picky...especially since you replied to my post
in misc.invest ......but the distinction needs to be made because
the term macros, or even "shell functions" might not be explanatory enough
to keep the novice,of the C Shell persuasion,from following your suggestion.
And we know that /etc/profile is greek to good ol' csh .... But, Bill...
take heart ... the man page for csh will tell you about alias'ing.  Alias'ing
a command in your .login will do the job here.... your "macro" will even go
with you into child processes! Something we Bourne dudes grumble about...

All of the purist stuff aside..... Bill's comment was that he feels this
loss of command usage any time he gets on a REAL UNIX box.  Watch out.  What
is REAL UNIX .... those using the BSD 4.? flavor of "REAL UNIX" might not like
this posting at all... there's a bourne shell that will instantaneously barf
at the sight of a shell function....there are a couple of built-ins missing
too ...sounds an awful lot like Sys III..... KORN to the rescue ....
Gary did put out the SysV.[23] disclaimer ...

One last thought .... Shell functions are memory resident.... if your system
administrator sees that all 400+ REAL UNIX users have "a bunch" of shell
functions in their log in shell process come monday,  he might get hot ...
just type in 'set' and see how much over-head your functions are taking ....


>I think more recent versions of Xenix support this, too....

That's right,  Gary ..... Shell functions are SVS V Bourne Shell PERIOD !
SCO XENIX V.2.2     ......etc ......

So Bill,  if you're stepping on to an unfamiliar ***NIX machine.... just
type in:

	  type type

If it doesn't come back with "type is a shell built-in"..... you might
as well just type in csh .... and alias away ......oooops ...or ksh ...

  ENOUGH
                  kevinc


DISCLAIM-IT .... THIS IS ME ... ALONE.... NO ONE ELSE ...I AM NOT PARANOID...........NO I DIDN'T....WHEN.....HOW ?????? ....