Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!unido!sapwdf!wohler
From: wohler@sapwdf.UUCP (Bill Wohler)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer
Subject: Re: MKS Shell .vs. Hamilton Shell
Keywords: Alternative Shells, UNIX
Message-ID: <2589@sapwdf.UUCP>
Date: 15 Feb 91 12:52:26 GMT
References: <1991Feb04.070011.7873@eecs.wsu.edu> <2307@hpuviea.UUCP> <1991Feb13.220816.27772@arnor.uucp>
Reply-To: Bill Wohler <wohler@sap-ag.de>
Organization: SAP AG, Walldorf, Germany
Lines: 30

[this was originally a private reply, but: 
	550 cpalmer@swamp.watson.ibm.com... Host unknown (Authoritative answer
	from name server)
charles, will you please post a return address that works. --bw]


cpalmer@swamp.watson.ibm.com writes:
>I'm considering which of the above shell/utility collections I want to
>recommend to a group of OS/2 folks who are moving to AIX. 
>Does anyone have any experiences with either or both of these packages?  

charles,

  i'm using the mks toolkit on os2.  the ksh is not bad.  there are a
  couple of annoying little problems (like C-p either doesn't work in
  a window or locks up the system in a full-screen rather than
  scrolling backwards through the history, but the up-arrow does this fine).
  their email folks are very responsive and say that this will be
  fixed soon and that they'll send us new copies.  besides that one
  problem, it works identically to the ksh on aix.

  i use the same .kshrc on both aix and os2 and the only thing that is
  different between them is the syntax and contents of the PATH and
  CDPATH variables.

  i've been happy with the shell and it sure beats the hell out of the
  os2 shell.

						--bw
						wohler@sap-ag.de