Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!warp.Eng.Sun.COM!rock From: rock@warp.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill Petro) Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell Subject: Re: Questions concerning BaSH Message-ID: <5570@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 9 Jan 91 19:54:29 GMT References: <71792@bu.edu.bu.edu> Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM Lines: 28 fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) writes: >>>>>> On 8 Jan 91 15:47:46 GMT, jc@bu-pub.bu.edu (James Cameron) said: >Overall, it's a matter of preference: sh or csh. I used to be a csh >user, but nowadays I much prefer sh. >Try it. >Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk | Q: How does a project get to be one >CS Dept., Univ. of Aalborg, DENMARK. | year late? A: One day at a time. How did you convert all your csh aliases back to (ba)sh style - other than one at a time :-) I liked the csh advantages over sh, and almost switched to ksh, but didn't want to convert my csh aliases in .cshrc over to (k)sh format. Then I found tcsh which gives me command line editing, (limited) history manipulation and very nice file completion. I would like the "function" capabilities of ksh or bash, but don't want the pain of converting each of my 200+ .cshrc aliases :-( Anyone have a quick fix? Bill "Rock" Petro - System Software Marketing -- Bill Petro {decwrl,hplabs,ucbvax}!sun!Eng!rock "UNIX for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" Matthew 19:12