Re: Sysinst default root login shell

[David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost>]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:13:41AM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> 
> But tcsh is a much nicer (imho) shell for interactive use than sh, and I 
> think we are talking about the login shell, and not the shell language...
> I'd say even csh is nicer than sh as an interactive shell.
> 
> Let's keep the issue of language apart from the interactive shell use. 
> People have a tendency of switching way too much over to sh (or bash 
> actually) just because the language is much better. But this does not 
> automatically make it a better shell for interactive use.

I have used csh - but not for about 25 years, IIRC that system didn't
support filename completion or job control.
I can't rememeber why I changed, but the addition of command history
and job control to the bourne shell made it a lot more usable.

One big problem with csh is that it is inappropriate for scripts
(even its own man page says so), and sometimes interactive commands
are really 'single use scripts' (I write commands that are several
hundred characters surprisingly often). There really isn't any
point in remembering 2 quite similar command languages.

        David

-- 
David Laight: david%l8s.co.uk@localhost