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 <24124>; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 12:09:23 -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 MAA17167; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 12:09:09 -0500
Received: (from arnold@localhost) by penfold.cc.gatech.edu (8.6.9/8.6.9) id MAA27471; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 12:09:08 -0500
From:	arnold@cc.gatech.edu (Arnold Robbins)
Message-Id: <199411291709.MAA27471@penfold.cc.gatech.edu>
Date:	Tue, 29 Nov 1994 12:09:07 -0500
In-Reply-To: Scott Schwartz's 22-line message on Nov 29, 11:10am
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>
Subject: Re: 9menu
Cc:	Sam Fans <sam-fans@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu>

> | That's not unreasonable, what I should probably do is fix 9menu to
> | just use ${SHELL:-/bin/sh}. 
> 
> I don't know... Isn't it better to have a definate syntax that 9menu
> will use, rather than have it depend on some environment variable?
> (Think about makefiles that need SHELL=/bin/sh at the top to get around
> some versions of make doing this.)  If anything, a command line option
> is better than importing SHELL, I think.

I agree, a command line option is better. Again, patches welcome, if not
I'll try to tackle it over the next week or so.

Arnold