Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rlgvax!hadron!jsdy
From: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Shell history
Message-ID: <336@hadron.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Mar-86 23:39:11 EST
Article-I.D.: hadron.336
Posted: Tue Mar 25 23:39:11 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Mar-86 05:59:33 EST
References: <1512@brl-smoke.ARPA> <140@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Organization: Hadron, Inc., Fairfax, VA
Lines: 19
Summary: Retraction & more history

In article <331@hadron.UUCP> jsdy@hadron.UUCP (I) write:
>In article <5924@mordor.UUCP> jdb@mordor.UUCP (John Bruner) writes:
>>Actually, the Bourne shell isn't a simple superset of the V6 (Thompson?)
>My memory says "Ritchie."

On better authority, Bruner was right and I was wrong.

>							  ...  (No,
>neither is the infamous "Bourne-again" shell.)

The "Bourne-again shell," to my knowledge, was a term jokingly used
after a talk by Dave Yost.  Dave noted that people's preference in
editors was largely a "religious issue" -- so he assumed the guise of
a preacher and tried to convert folk to the one, true, holy editor.
He was asked whether this required the Bourne-again shell.  I wasn't
aware that this term had passed into any more common usage.
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}