Talk:Tcsh

message: Does anyone know if tcsh is known as the TENEX C-shell or the Turbo C-shell? I've heard it called both, but what is the official ruling? --Curtisf14 15:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official site, or whoever is developing it nowadays (same thing), doesn't seem to say. Debian votes for TENEX, however, and I can't find even cursory mentions of "turbo". -- Gwern  (contribs) 16:41, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's some variant of TENEX/TWENEX/TOPS-20, most probably TENEX; I was one of the early users/developers. The completion and help features were a deliberate knock-off of the TENEX shell, hence the name. (Many people don't realize it has a ton of builtin help features, including the ability to give completions and suggestions apropos to the particular command/argument being edited.) 12.103.251.203 01:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming

message: Is it worth mentioning that the c-shell has many problems? (for example it's not possible to independently redirect stdout and stderr).
Have a look at: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
Still many systems use the c-shell as their default root shell.  Why is this so?
217.229.204.107 13:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main requirement for a root shell is that it depends on as few libraries as possible.  So that they can all be on the root mount.  You do not want to lose access to the root shell just because some drive didn't mount.  Regards, Ben Aveling 11:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

text: (????) Sorry, but your statement is a little too bold.  Does tcsh address the independent redirect issue (stdout/stderr)?  I don't think it ever solved that.  To this day I come across tcsh scripts that fire off a temporary BASH invocation when that is needed.Tgm1024 (talk) 15:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with the c-shell 

message: Taco-shell is also a valid and popular pronunciation of tcsh.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.84.35 (talk) 23:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thinking back, the most common way I've heard folks refer to the C-Shell is as "csh" ("see-es-AYCH").  Odd.  I almost never hear "TC shell" spoken as such.  I hear "tcsh" ("tee-see-es-AYCH").  Not sure why, since they weren't referring to the shell invocation, but the shell itself. Tgm1024 (talk) 01:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronounciation 

message: This screenshot is worthless!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.13.70 (talk) 10:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose almost 7 years ago, you was looking at the same ugly screenshot that i do now. That with heap of repeating garbage urls absolutely not having any deal with demonstrating the shell's specifics or characteristics. I believe it meets the wikipedia's copyright-related requirements though.
77.52.154.61 (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshot 

message: As one of the engineers there at the time I can say absolutely that Fred was not Mac OS X's lead engineer, that isn't how the project worked. If there was a 'lead' for the entire project it was probably Avie, But over in the kernel team I'd say it was JoeS. Fred did convert many of the *bsd **/*bin projects to Apple's build system. This probably did include tcsh at the time.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.129.224.36 (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fred Sanchez was not Mac OS X's lead engineer