Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!widyono From: widyono@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Aasmodeus) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Arp vs CLI vs CShell Message-ID: <37693@netnews.upenn.edu> Date: 16 Feb 91 18:51:57 GMT Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu Reply-To: widyono@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Aasmodeus) Organization: University of Pennsylvania Lines: 31 Here I am again... I've only begun to become more confused... Which is better... ARP commands, or the CLI (NewShell) ? I've heard bad things about both (i.e. ARP mount doesn't work, CLI takes up more disk space (BTW, I boot off a 40mb HD so that doesn't matter) and is slower... How about the CShell that's come out as 1.02 on ab20? Is that better than both because it seems to do pattern-matching well, is resident, and uses less space than CLI. It doesn't have its own mount command so it uses the original (er, if that's the CLI original, then it should work, correct?). I seem to like it very much, but am a wary customer.... I doubt I'll go invest in getting the ARP archive. BTW, note for Matt Dillon, Carlo Borreo, and Cesare Dieni (authors): Excellent stuff, except for the man command: wouldn't it be easy to insert a table of contents encoded and hidden (to a text reader) which would allow quick access to 1) find out if the argument exists in the doc file, and 2) where it exists ? Man seems to search thru this file every time I use it. :| Even on a HD it's quite slow. Daniel Widyono "Aas" <. .> ________SEAS: BE (+ CSE hopeful) 3450 Chestnut St. Box 86 . __ //only /widyono @ eniac.seas.upenn.edu Philadelphia, PA, 19104 \_/ \X/ Amiga/ I voted 4 Bill & Opus too. Darn. *** I HATE not being able to do rm *. :| Then again, I'd hate to be *** *** ABLE to do it :) I LOVE the piping: it even works with MORE's *** *** which use a file requester (I just select the pipe file in RAM: *** *** as input). Saddam is a butt. These are all my own opinions. :. ***