From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ron@ronnatalie.com (Ronald Natalie)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 13:32:23 -0500
Subject: [TUHS] Origin year of BSD csh?
In-Reply-To: <20160626181450.GK26734@mcvoy.com>
References: <201606261014.u5QAE1qX015184@skeeve.com>
 <5770032F.8030306@mhorton.net> <20160626181450.GK26734@mcvoy.com>
Message-ID: <18119E4C-CE7E-44BD-B2D2-D7B32850238F@ronnatalie.com>

I detested the CSH syntax.   In order to beat back the CSH proponents at BRL, I added JOB control to the SV  (and later SVR2) Bourne Shell.   Then they beat on me for not having command like editing in (a la TCSH), so I added that.   This shell went out as /bin/sh in the Doug Gwyn SV-on-BSD release so every once and a while over the years I trip across a “Ron shell” usually people who were running Mach-derived things that ran my shell as /bin/sh. 


> On Jun 26, 2016, at 1:14 PM, Larry McVoy <lm at mcvoy.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 09:30:39AM -0700, Mary Ann Horton wrote:
>> I brought csh with me to Bell Labs in the summer of 1979.  The folks at Bell
>> Labs recoiled in horror: they had just gone through a painful conversion
>> from the Mashey shell to the Bourne shell
> 
> I used csh for a while before ksh became available.  It was an improvement
> over the Bourne shell, IMO, but once ksh came out I went back to Bourne
> shell syntax.  And now bash is pretty nice.
> 
> --lm