From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from burdell.cc.gatech.edu ([130.207.3.207]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <24018>; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 10:11:00 -0500
Received: from penfold.cc.gatech.edu (arnold@penfold.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.3.249]) by burdell.cc.gatech.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA10656; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 10:10:50 -0500
Received: (from arnold@localhost) by penfold.cc.gatech.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id KAA27318; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 10:10:48 -0500
From:	arnold@cc.gatech.edu (Arnold Robbins)
Message-Id: <199411291510.KAA27318@penfold.cc.gatech.edu>
Date:	Tue, 29 Nov 1994 10:10:48 -0500
In-Reply-To: Scott Schwartz's 25-line message on Nov 28, 10:08pm
X-Ultrix: Just Say NO!
X-Important-Saying: Premature Optimization Is The Root Of All Evil.
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To:	Scott Schwartz <schwartz@galapagos.cse.psu.edu>,
	Sam Fans <sam-fans@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu>
Subject: Re: 9menu
Cc:	arnold@skeeve.atl.ga.us

I sent the announcement to sam-fans since that seems to be where most
of the discussion of 9term takes place. I figured 9fans was more for
discussion of the real thing, not faking it under Unix.

As to this:

> To: Sam Fans <sam-fans@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu>
> Subject: 9menu
> Date: 	Mon, 28 Nov 1994 22:08:29 -0500
> From: Scott Schwartz <schwartz@galapagos.cse.psu.edu>
> 
> As long as we are being 9fans, how about this:
> 
> --- 1.1	1994/11/29 03:02:07
> +++ 9menu.c	1994/11/29 03:02:53
> @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@
>  		return;
>  
>  	close(ConnectionNumber(dpy));
> -	execl("/bin/sh", "sh", "-c", com, NULL);
> +	execl("/bin/rc", "rc", "-c", com, NULL);
>  	_exit(1);
>  }

That's not unreasonable, what I should probably do is fix 9menu to
just use ${SHELL:-/bin/sh}. If I find some spare time I'll probably
do that.  If someone wishes to beat me to it and mail me a patch,
that's fine too.

Arnold