Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!oliveb!sun!thetone!swilson
From: swilson%thetone@Sun.COM (Scott Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Shells everywhere (was Re: Cobol Data Corporation Cyber 180 ...)
Message-ID: <85480@sun.uucp>
Date: 16 Jan 89 19:15:33 GMT
References: <10847@tekecs.TEK.COM> <1185@esunix.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.uucp
Reply-To: swilson@sun.UUCP (Scott Wilson)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 26

In article <1185@esunix.UUCP> bpendlet@esunix.UUCP (Bob Pendleton) writes:
>Wouldn't it just be easier to write a shell as a replacement for
>COMMAND.COM?
>
>A program running under MSDOS can load another program into unused
>memory, start it running and be awakened when the program terminates.
>Check out the SHELL verb under MSBasic or spawn under TurboC 2.0 for
>examples. This ability makes it possible to write quite a reasonable
>shell under MSDOS.
>
>Check out "Software Tools" by Kernighan & Plauger(SP?) for more
>information on how to write a shell for OSs that don't support UNIX
>system calls.

For those interested, there is a book by Allen Holub called (I think):
On Command, a UNIX like shell for DOS.  Anyway, it's something close
to that and describes how to write a UNIX-like shell for DOS.  Either
floppies come with it or can be purchased separately that have source
and executables.  All of this is from memory so the details may
be somewhat fuzzy.


--
Scott Wilson		arpa: swilson@sun.com
Sun Microsystems	uucp: ...!sun!swilson
Mt. View, CA