Of course not. Nobody in their right mind uses csh for scripting.
To my great horror, csh is used in most of the DNS debugging and many of the log-processing scripts that I have inherited. One of these days, I will finally live up to my threat of importing all this functionality into other programs that use other languages (toss "doc" and incorporate that functionality into "dnswalk", etc...), but that has not happened yet.
Meanwhile, I don't know that a dynamic vs. static csh does me any measurable harm -- the delays waiting for responses from nameservers will overwhelm any local delays caused by dynamic vs. static linking.
-- Brad Knowles, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E-(---) W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++) _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
