From: Andrew DeFaria
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 5:36 PM
OS wars begin(?) - Please, do not!
Non-protable to such "OSes" that don't have a more modern shell then Bourne/Ash I guess. Are there any "OSes" that don't support shells like csh, tcsh, ksh, bash?
Old info; AmigaOS had(has) very little support for fork() as all of the OS ran(runs) in the same memory space (under special circumstanses there was a vfork() though; see geekgadgets below. In addition to the "lightweight threads" that were/are standard).
bash, and might I guess - most of those above, are/is littered with fork() calls IIUC (I have not looked).
I'm not too sure if fork()-use is to be considered "state of the art" and thus make a containing project be considered "modern". Without really knowing I would have thought better of such projects if they'd used pthreads or some such instead. [ This statement is based on "basic OS theory" taught at university college in Sweden at least ]
IMO your "modern shell" statement above is about the same as was stating "DOS compatible" a number of years ago. [BG: 640K ought to be enough...]
About AmigaOS:
There was(is) a pdksh available though. It was(is) included in the "geekgadgets" unix emulation project.
Yes, geekgadgets was the same for AmigaOS as cygwin currently is for Windows.
I believe "Fred Fish" is well known to former cygnus.com and gdb people? He was the initiatior(?) of geekgadgets, at least he held his hand on it for a long time.
Actually this project still exists, but has a very "low profile" as most of its users and maintainers are gone.
/Hannu E K Nevalainen, B.Sc. EE - Amiga user since '85 (the beginning)
-- printf("Timezone: %s\n", (DST)?"UTC+02":"UTC+01"); --
--END OF MESSAGE--