Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!ulysses!cjc
From: cjc@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Chris Calabrese[rs])
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: More notes from V.4.0 software developer conference (LONG)
Message-ID: <10707@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Date: 7 Oct 88 21:06:46 GMT
References: <10421@tekecs.TEK.COM> <1988Oct6.183106.1110@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 23

In article <1988Oct6.183106.1110@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> In article <10421@tekecs.TEK.COM> andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes:
> > [...]
> 
> I trust everyone got a good laugh out of this.  The way to discard one
> of the three shells is to discard it, now.  Same thing for the other stuff:

I heartily agree.  The obvious solution (in my mind) is to
'ln /bin/ksh /bin/sh'.  Since ksh will work (almost) exactly like
sh (most of the differences being bugs in sh)
without the various environment variables which turn on history, etc.
defined, there is no reason not to do this.

The only problem I can think of off the top of my head is the
behavior of 'echo \c'.

BTW, we did this a long time ago around here, and I have done
so on my own personal machine.
-- 
--------
	Christopher J. Calabrese
	AT&T Bell Laboratories
	ulysses!cjc