This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: How well supported is csh/tcsh?
- From: Tim Hubberstey <thcyglist at yahoo dot com>
- To: Cygwin List <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: How well supported is csh/tcsh?
--- Jason Pearce wrote:
> I have been using bash within my Cygwin environment thus
> far. But all are other UNIX machines are set up to use
> /bin/csh so I am considering making the shift to either
> /bin/csh or /bin/tcsh under cygwin.
> Preliminary experiments look good, but I have the feeling
> the majority of Cygwin users are with bash, even if I have
> no factual basis for it! So
> o Do most new/upgraded packages work or do you always have
> to port setup scripts?
Not an issue, see other posts
> o Can I use tsch as a "nicer" csh and should this be fully
> compatible with csh?
> o Any testimonials good or bad?
I've been using tcsh for about 10 years now, but only for interactive
shells. bash may have caught up to tcsh's user interface features but
tcsh is (usually) available on older machines that don't have bash.
I *always* use sh for scripts in order to have the highest probability
of them being portable. For Cygwin, I actually delete the sh.exe and
create a symlink from 'sh.exe' to 'bash.exe'. I find the Cygwin
implementation of 'sh' (really 'ash') to be inadequate (I believe it
was because of unsupported builtins, I stopped using it quite a while
ago so I don't really remember).
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html