Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "smake".
Did you mean:
make
2015 Apr 27
3
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote:
> > The schily tools act as a container to publish the current code state. There is
> > no such maintained web page.
>
> I was referring to the summary on the SourceForge page, where you just list the contents of the package without explaining why one would want to download it.
I thought I don't need to make advertizing for
2015 Apr 27
0
Real sh? Or other efficient shell for non-interactive scripts
...ls to show people how the first shell with an
> interactive editable history did look like. Bsh != Bourne Shell.
Yes, I realize that osh is closer to the original Bourne shell. My point is that you can?t expect people to just know, without having been told, why they want bsh, or osh, bosh, or smake, or?
Most of these tools compete with tools that are already in CentOS. If you want people to use these instead, you?re not going to persuade many people with a tarball.
As for the tools that do not have equivalents in CentOS, the file name is not an explanation.
You can?t expect people to just...
2012 Feb 06
6
schily tools
Hey folks,
I'm reading up on gtar for tape archiving and it sounds kind of nasty and
not something I really want to rely on.
It looks like star from the schily tools is preferred. I'm using Centos
(and RHEL) 5.7 which seems to have star but not sdd.
Which leads me to believe that the Schily tools are maybe a bit "rogue"
My basic requirement with what I'm doing is to use