Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Re^2: Should ``csh'' be part of the System V distribution?
Message-ID: <7924@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 18 May 88 17:50:01 GMT
References: <2599@usceast.UUCP> <2601@usceast.UUCP> <10857@steinmetz.ge.com> <762@ambush.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 17

In article <762@ambush.UUCP> kimcm@ambush.UUCP (Kim Chr. Madsen) writes:
>Bourne Shell (System V Version):
>	- No easy alias mechanism (functions are inadequate)

How so?  Functions are more general than aliases.

>	- No history mechanism

One can be added easily enough.  We have one in ours.  You can also do
this much better using a separate process, for example "mux" running in
your terminal.

>	- Offers only a one-time start-up script (.profile (/etc/profile))

You can obtain .logout yourself by planting an exit trap in your .profile.
Csh sources .login and .cshrc in the wrong order, sources .cshrc even for
scripts, and the hardwired names are inflexible.  BRL's shell uses the
ENV=file option to trigger our equivalent of .cshrc.