From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail.uunet.ca ([142.77.1.1]) by hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu with SMTP id <2721>; Mon, 29 Jun 1992 19:37:29 -0400
Received: from xenitec.on.ca ([192.75.213.1]) by mail.uunet.ca with SMTP id <9939>; Mon, 29 Jun 1992 19:37:18 -0400
Received: from golem by xenitec.xenitec.on.ca id aa12830; 29 Jun 92 19:34 EDT
To:	Bob Gibson <rjg@sco.COM>
cc:	The rc Mailing List <rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu>
Subject: Re: recent -s patch 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 28 Jun 92 21:36:55 EDT."
             <9206282136.aa02955@imp.scocan.sco.COM> 
Date:	Mon, 29 Jun 1992 19:19:22 -0400
From:	"David J. Fiander" <davidf@golem.uucp>
Message-ID: <9206291919.aa27683@golem.UUCP>

>From:  	Bob Gibson <rjg@sco.com>
>| Hey, can anyone on the list tell us
>| all if they have any reason at all for wanting -s?  Inquiring minds
>| want to know.  So far, we have Rich's reason, which is that -s is
>| passed to the invoked shell by `the OSF/1 script command'.  Any
>| other takers?
>
>My editor, jove, starts up subshells with the -s option, and obviously
>fails to do so if the shell doesn't support it.  In this case, the
>correct thing to do would be to fix jove to make this configurable.

The reason that jove does this is because is starts the shell
with either its command line arguments or the file names
associated with its buffers as arguments to the shell.  That
is, is says

	$SHELL -s file1 file2 file3

This way you can easily refer to the files you are editting in
your subshell.

It would be nice if this feature was documented, though.

- David