From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp1.libero.it ([193.70.192.51]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <25945>; Fri, 5 May 2000 23:07:07 -0400 Received: from LocalHost (151.32.183.206) by smtp1.libero.it; 4 May 2000 17:37:04 +0200 Received: from carlos by localhost with local (Exim 2.05 #1 (Debian)) id 12nNOK-0003Ch-00; Thu, 4 May 2000 17:18:16 +0200 Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 11:18:16 -0400 From: Carlo Strozzi To: rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu Subject: Re: building rc on QNX4 Message-ID: <20000504171816.B12075@polka.mi.linux.it> Reply-To: carlos@texne.com Mail-Followup-To: rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu References: <20000427193948.A15307@tango.texne.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from tjg@star.le.ac.uk on Tue, May 02, 2000 at 10:41:13AM -0400 Organization: TeXne.COM On Tue, May 02, 2000 at 10:41:13AM -0400, Tim Goodwin wrote: >> Also, I think that the name 'rc' is sometimes a too short one. On AIX, >> for instance, it conflicts with the system startup script /etc/rc. (...) >Sounds a bit close to `tcsh' to me :-). But if that's what you want, >just say > > sh configure '--program-suffix=sh' Hmm ... that's not the point. What I mean is that the new additional name should be set by the mainstream distribution of Rc, just to acquire such name. This is especially true for Debian GNU/Linux, where whoever acquires a name first "wins". Anyway, this is not at all a big issue, and I am not going to insist on it :-). Mine was just a general concern about using too short names for programs less ubiquitous than /bin/sh. A more important issue IMHO is whether Rc should provide a built-in read function, similar to the one offered by most Bourne shells; another one is whether it will ever make it possible not to export everything to the environment by default. Any thoughts about this ? bye -carlo -- I can read MIME or uuencoded e-mail attachments in PDF, Postscript, HTML, RTF or text formats. Please do not send Word or Excel files.