Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ho95b.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!ho95b!wcs
From: wcs@ho95b.UUCP (Bill Stewart)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.unix
Subject: Re: ksh availability
Message-ID: <333@ho95b.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Mar-85 17:35:45 EST
Article-I.D.: ho95b.333
Posted: Tue Mar 12 17:35:45 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Mar-85 01:25:26 EST
References: <10005@ulysses.UUCP> <15757@mgweed.UUCP> <9071@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.followup:4642 net.unix:3915

Doug Gwyn asked:
> Question:  Is ksh completely compatible with the SVR2 Bourne shell?
> I seem to recall hearing that function definition was different..

No, the Sys V R2 Bourne-shell-upgrade is not compatible with ksh.
Lots of things are different, and the ksh stuff is mostly better.
I don't have ksh source on this machine, but Korn wrote a preliminary analysis
of the differences that comes with the source.  Most of the difference are
either syntax (both shells doing the same thing, just a shade differently), or
features in ksh that aren't in SysVR2sh.  For me, the latter is the important
concern - the Korn shell history mechanism is nice (yes, I've used csh.)

There is a "batch"-like interface similar in capability to csh's history, but the
interesting interface is the VISUAL mode - the current line on your CRT is a
one-line screen-editor window into your history file; you can set EDITOR=vi or
EDITOR=*macs to get vi-style or emacs-style editing commands.

			Bill Stewart, ihnp4!ho95c!wcs