Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!ficc!karl
From: karl@ficc.uu.net (karl lehenbauer)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Cobol Data Corporation Cyber 180 (was Re: 64 bits)
Keywords: CDC,Cyber180
Message-ID: <2708@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 12 Jan 89 15:26:30 GMT
References: <28200249@mcdurb> <451@babbage.acc.virginia.edu> <1951@scolex> <5657@cbmvax.UUCP>
Organization: Ferranti International Controls
Lines: 17

In article <5657@cbmvax.UUCP>, jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes:
>	You're talking shells, not "Unix".  It should be possible to write
>a shell for almost any usable computer, a shell that does wildcarding ala Unix.
>Many people mistake Csh, bourne-shell (Sh), or Korn-shell (Ksh) with "Unix".

Well, it is really more than just the shell, because Unix programs get
their arguments through the argc/argv mechanism, and they are for the most
part written to expect an arbitrary number of file names on the command
line, hence they are written to expect the shell to expand wildcards, as
all the shells you mention do.  So to the extent that the shells and the
the contents of /bin and /usr/bin are Unix, Unix supports wildcards.  Granted,
there is no support necessary for this at the kernel level, although Unix'
storing of directories as regular files makes processing them easy.
-- 
-- uunet!ficc!karl	"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
-- karl@ficc.uu.net	encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without 
			understanding." -- Justice Louis O. Brandeis