home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!ai-lab!life.ai.mit.edu!friedman
- From: friedman@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Noah Friedman)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell
- Subject: Re: file name completion for ksh?
- Message-ID: <FRIEDMAN.92Jul24042018@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
- Date: 24 Jul 92 08:20:18 GMT
- References: <1992Jul20.143443.16536@rtsg.mot.com> <m5fmwq.sjs@netcom.com>
- <1992Jul23.033602.19925@news.eng.convex.com>
- <1992Jul23.082108.29589@news.acns.nwu.edu>
- Sender: news@ai.mit.edu
- Distribution: na
- Organization: Free Software Foundation, 675 Mass Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139
- Lines: 20
- In-reply-to: navarra@casbah.acns.nwu.edu's message of 23 Jul 92 08:21:08 GMT
-
- In article <1992Jul23.082108.29589@news.acns.nwu.edu> navarra@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (John Navarra) writes:
- >In article <1992Jul23.033602.19925@news.eng.convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
- >>From the keyboard of sjs@netcom.com (Stephen Schow):
- >>:The ksh is hands down the best. As the last response showed, there is usually
- >>:a way to do it in the ksh. In addition, the ksh has tons of over features
- >>:that none of the other shells can even touch.
- >>
- >>Down boy. That's overkill. Read the tcsh man page some day.
- >>
- > And zsh has even more features! Ruf! Ruf!
-
- Ah yes, features. What would we do without them? Probably get more
- work done, instead of endlessly tweaking our environments to no useful end.
-
- I probably have the most complicated initialization scripts that anyone
- has ever devised (if you don't believe me, email me and we can arrange to
- compare). One of these days, when I come to my senses, I'll switch to rc
- and use it vanilla.
-
- Features? You need features like you need poison ivy.
-