NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/comp/os/linux/6908

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-28 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!mips!bridge2!gilligan!camerons
From: [e-mail] (Cameron Spitzer 764-6339)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: ksh for Linux ...(do they exist?)
Summary: no but PD KSH is good enough
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 28 Jul 92 22:32:17 GMT
References: <pcmmn=[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: 3Com Corp
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: gilligan.nad.3com.com



In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (All you touch & all you see is all your life will ever be.) writes:
>Hi all,
>
>I havn't noticed any mention of ksh (korn shell) being available for Linux..Is
>it?  Is the source code available somewhere if not?
>
>

I've recently gone from a real Korn Shell (HP-UX and SCO) to PD KSH, after a brief encounter
with bash.  IMHO all are fine shells, and generally easier to use and better documented than csh.
The real Korn shell is AT&T proprietary thru & thru and if someone offers you "free" source you
should yell "Narc!" and run away! :-)

I've got a list of nuances which I discovered while
porting my startup file, for anyone who wants to enhance PD KSH to look more like Genuine Bell;
I won't waste everybody else's bandwidth, so ask if you want it.  The biggest difference I
found is the Genuine Bell Korn Shell has array variables (like csh) but bash and PD KSH do
not.   I am using PD KSH now because its command line editor seems to know more vi than bash's
does.

Thanks to all you OS Activists for your good work and abstinence from silly flames!
Best wishes from Cameron in San Jose, aka [e-mail]