From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:58:30 +0200 From: Lucio De Re To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: [9fans] Re: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=5B9fans=5D_Re:_=5B9fans=5D_Re:_R=E9f=2E_:_Re:_=5B9fans?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?=5D_Silly_porting_fun_=28RC_for_Unix=29?= Message-ID: <20000718095830.L2260@cackle.proxima.alt.za> References: <4125691F.003EAEEA.00@SNPAR12.> <20000717032916.A1998@cyber-dyne.com> <20000718083039.G2260@cackle.proxima.alt.za> <200007180716.AAA22194@ohio.river.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200007180716.AAA22194@ohio.river.org>; from Richard on Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:16:21AM -0700 Topicbox-Message-UUID: e0ea194a-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 12:16:21AM -0700, Richard wrote: > > who decided to use RC in early Linux? Linus? I don't really know, but it was early enough (I think it may have been before the great Torval/Tannembaum debate, even) to have been entirely under Linus' development. I seem to recall it involved a lack of public domain shells at the time. In passing, I got to use the rather extraordinary command history facility that was released with rc for unix and I must confess it seemed adequate. I may have more trouble today, of course. I wonder if there isn't merit in recording one's commands in some creative fashion (why have thirteen consecutive copies of "ls -l" in the history file?) and handing them to PLUMB is some useful manner? Thoughts? ++L