Michael,
About a year ago I tried a multitude of these ported shells in an effort
to compile perl from source (it would not compile from the standard command
prompt). I was not able to accomplish this task with either. In addition, I
wanted an alternative shell to run under emacs on windows (98 to be precise).
Again after much effort I was unable to get acceptable results. Perhaps these
are not the best yardsticks to measure a shell by. If I recall correctly I tried
a port of bash, csh, tcsh, and 4DOS.
Matt
On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Michael Prager wrote:
> At 03:57 PM 02/22/2002 -0500, Matt Calder wrote:
>
> >Right, what windows lacks is a decent shell in which to use these
> >tools. If anyone knows otherwise please share.
>
> Last time I investigated, most of the Unix shells had been ported to
> Windows, if that's what you mean by "decent." Most of them are available free.
>
> A more MS-like shell is available commercially. That is 4NT (or 4DOS for
> the DOS-based Windows versions) from JP Software. Those shells provide
> command aliasing and abbreviation; directory history recall; command
> recall, completion, and editing; ability to associate command files with
> interpreters; and more, while retaining quite close compatibility with the
> native MS shells. What the JP programs don't provide is a direct
> translation of Unix shell scripting languages (which to me are overly
> cryptic); however, you can easily use Python or other scripting language
> (or use the 4NT/4DOS extended batch language, certainly no worse than that
> of the Unix shells).
>
> Another option would be to install a complete Unix emulation layer, like
> the MKS toolkit or (I believe) cygwin.
>
> There are excellent Windows character-based file managers, editors, etc.,
> available for free or at nominal cost.
>
> Those are some of the options for making Windows shell usage more
> interesting and productive. Whether any person will find them as good as,
> worse than, or about the same as some of the Unix shells will be a matter
> of taste (and perhaps habit).
>
> (Note that none of the above should be construed as official NOAA opinion
> or endorsement.)
>
> --
> Michael Prager, Ph.D. <Mike.Prager@noaa.gov>
> NOAA Beaufort Laboratory
> Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
> http://shrimp.ccfhrb.noaa.gov/~mprager/
> ***
>
>
|